Displacement and Protecting the Rights of Children

Displacement and Protecting the Rights of Children

Although displacement and resettlement are very old phenomena, it was in the 1980s that debates around these issues began to gain visibility. The activist movements against displacement in India and other countries across the world drew attention to the scale of this phenomenon. As Cernea and Guggenheim write, ‘The 1980s might well go down in history as the “decade of displacement”. Resettlement has slowly moved into the limelight of development concerns… Another source has been the widely publicised and increasingly well-organised resistance to resettlement in many parts of the world’ (Guggenheim and Cernea 1993). Around this time, the various impacts of displacement on diverse groups also began to be recognised. Although women comprised 50 per cent of the displaced and affected population, calls for the [Page 83]introduction of gender-based analysis were not always well-received. Indeed bringing forth gender issues in the early and mid-1980s was often met with resistance and the voicing of fears that they may hamper and factionalise the ‘larger movement.’ Over the years, however, with more and more vocal demands from women themselves, as well as development analysts, the situation slowly began to change (see Chapters 12 and 13 by Ramkuwar and Palit, respectively, in this volume).

Today, two decades later, it is widely accepted that any understanding or discussions of displacement, relocation, resettlement or rehabilitation would be incomplete without considering their gender dimensions. In fact, most policy documents now make an effort to address (read: accommodate) women's concerns. While this is no doubt a very significant move, it is important that policy and law-makers realise that the concerns of women cannot be addressed by simply adding one or two mandatory clauses to a policy or legal document. Rather, there is a need to examine the document through a ‘gender lens’ and ensure that all clauses are gender-sensitive and do not violate the rights or interests of either gender—women or men. In other words, the law or policy must address the concerns of all people in a gender-sensitive manner and ensure their participation and informed consent at all stages.

This, however, has still to take place because several malaises persist in almost all analyses of social processes (including displacement and rehabilitation). Unfortunately, the household is assumed to be the smallest unit of convergent interests wherein the benefits and burdens are shared by all its members. As Agarwal (1988: 83) and Sen (1981) have shown, while there are overall negative effects of displacement on the poor, women and female children are affected more because of the already existing intra-household inequalities. In other words, those household members who are already vulnerable are affected even more in situations of stress and trauma. But such sensitivity is rarely reflected in most policy and planning in the country (see Chapter 10 by Shankaran, in this volume).

As with women in the earlier decades, children, though perhaps the most vulnerable group among the displaced, continue to be largely invisible. Recognising this gap, this chapter focuses on the particular problems and vulnerabilities encountered by children in the processes of displacement, relocation, resettlement and rehabilitation. Rarely do children find any mention in policy and legal documents. Where indeed they do, it is usually as part of a discussion on women. Even though in [Page 84]many cases the concerns of women and children are inextricably linked, each group also has its specific interests and needs, and these must be acknowledged and addressed. Largely, children are yet to receive recognition as an independent affected category.<>

...