No abstract available. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / gm2014 / Centre for Human Rights / unrestricted

京都大学 / 新制・課程博士 / 博士(法学) / 甲第24366号 / 法博第289号 / 新制||法||178(附属図書館) / 京都大学大学院法学研究科法政理論専攻 / (主査)教授 濵本 正太郎, 教授 酒井 啓亘, 教授 鈴木 基史 / 学位規則第4条第1項該当 / Doctor of Laws / Kyoto University / DFAM

The aim of this thesis is to examine the rights of internally displaced persons as well as finding out whose responsibility it is to maintain these rights. The questions being answered are: what policies, laws and conventions are addressing internally displaced persons in Somalia (mainly from within Somalia, UN and AU)? And; which principal similarities and differences in these documents are to find regarding what type of protection internally displaced persons can get? Whose responsibility is it to intervene if these rights and rules are not maintained? To answer these questions I have used a liberal-universal theoretical framework. The analysis is a describing case study of comparative nature between the Provisional Somalia Constitution, UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement and the Kampala Convention. The result shows that there are many different rights of internally displaced persons in Somalia. Instead the problem seems to be based on the rights not being maintained in combination with the complex question of whose responsibility it is.

This study aims to identify potential ways in which the African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa (Kampala Convention) improves the quality of life for IDPs. Relying on the concept of bare life, it answers if and how the convention prevents bare life. Drawing on theory and previous research on bare life in relation to IDPs, the analytical framework forms four theoretical dimensions to which the Kampala Convention, Translating The Kampala Convention Into Practice: A Stocktaking Exercise (ICRC, 2017) and The Kampala Convention: Key Recommendations Ten Years On (ICRC, 2019) are applied. Based on a grading, the results tell of the convention’s effects. The IDPs’ rights and political agency are adequately respected; quotidian culture and prevention of exclusionary practices are promoted yet insufficiently. Adding humanitarianism, biopolitics and host communities as additional findings, there are areas that should be carefully respected, but bare life is mostly prevented. Hopefully, this study can add knowledge to the progress of the Kampala Convention and provide a framework for similar analyses of policy and practice on aiding people in distress.