WORKSHOP REPORT Durable Solutions in Zamboanga 1 - 3 October 2014 in Zamboanga, Philippines Durable Solutions in Zamboanga Zamboanga, Philippines 1 - 3 October 2014 Introduction IDMC has been monitoring the displacement crisis in to who will be entitled to assistance means that many Zamboanga since its onset and has on previous occasions are expected to remain displaced beyond 2014. As such, expressed concern about the future of people displaced they will continue to need humanitarian assistance and by the September 2013 siege of the city. In June 2014, we would benefit from efforts to help them achieve durable conducted a mission to collect information on their living solutions in line with international standards. conditions, identify obstacles to their re-establishing their lives, liaise with those providing protection and assistance, and engage in policy-making on durable solutions. Challenges to durable solutions We submitted a proposal for a workshop on durable solu- IDPs in Zamboanga face numerous protection concerns tions in response to a request from the government’s that constitute important obstacles to their achievement Commission on Human Rights of the Philippines (CHR). of durable solutions. Implementation of the city govern- Its aims were to build capacity among local authorities ment’s recovery and reconstruction plan (Z3R) may result and others involved in the promotion and facilitation of in “building back better” at the expense of some IDPs, durable solutions; to encourage a gender, age and di- particularly those from disadvantaged Muslim minorities versity approach; to reinforce national authorities’ un- with no formal land rights, who could be propelled deeper derstanding of housing land and property (HLP) rights; into poverty and vulnerability. and to ensure compliance with international standards. These issues seemed particularly relevant in the context Living conditions in camps of Zamboanga, given that the extent to which internally Conditions in camps in which people have lived for more displaced people (IDPs) will be able to exercise their right than a year are reported to be inadequate. The assistance to return is still unclear. provided, including food, water, shelter and health care, has not been enough to protect IDPs, and particularly the Background The siege of parts of Zamboanga city by a faction of the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and the fighting that ensued led to around 10,000 houses being damaged or destroyed and forced around 120,000 people to flee. Many took refuge in evacuation centres set up by the local government, but the majority sheltered with family or friends elsewhere in the city. Several neighbourhoods were all but razed, with public and commercial buildings also hit hard. Severe flooding in the area in October 2013 displaced another 33,000 people, and made living con- ditions for those who had fled the conflict much worse. Many IDPs managed to return to their homes in the months after the conflict, but a year later almost a third were still unable to do so, either because their houses had not been rebuilt or because they were living in parts of the city the local government declared “no return” areas. Around 43,000 people were still displaced in the city as of October 2014, of whom 23,000 were living in evacuation centres and transitional sites. The local government’s current plans foresee the re- Displaced families interact with each other at close proximity in the Joaquin turn or relocation of the majority of IDPs to permanent Enriquez Memorial Stadium, Zamboanga’s largest camp which hosted close housing, but slow implementation and uncertainty as to 2,500 families in June 2014. Photo: IDMC, June 2014 4 Internal Displacement Monitoring Centre | 1 - 3 October 2014 More people were relocated to the Mampang Transitory Site in Mampang district, Zamboanga. Photo: IDMC, June 2014 most vulnerable groups such as children and older peo- The city government does not consider many of the peo- ple, from the risk of malnutrition and disease. Access to ple currently living in evacuation centres to be legitimate clean water and sanitation remains a problem, both in the IDPs displaced by the conflict, but rather people who larger evacuation centres such as the Joaquin Enriquez arrived afterwards from neighbouring provinces to take Memorial Sports Complex and in transitional sites such advantage of the humanitarian and housing assistance as Masepla in Mampang district, to which nearly 4,000 on offer. In September 2014, the city council passed a IDPs have been relocated in 2014. resolution calling for their prompt eviction and return to their “home” provinces. Data gathered by the UN Refugee A recent assessment by the UN Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Agency (UNHCR), however, contradicts the government and Action Against Hunger (ACF) suggests that more view. The agency’s profiling ofIDP s in evacuation centres than half of the children over the age of two in both evacu- and transitional sites contradicts the city government’s ation centres and transitional sites are malnourished. Lo- view and suggests that the overwhelming majority, in- cal media reported that 167 IDPs had died in displacement cluding informal settlers, i.e. those without formal land since September 2013, mostly from respiratory infections titles, had been living in Zamboanga for many years and and other communicable diseases. Half of them were had been displaced by the conflict.2 children under the age of five.1 Prolonged displacement and the absence of community support networks mean Temporary relocation v resettlement that vulnerable groups such as young children have been Some informal settlers have been offered assistance to exposed to protection risks including sexual abuse, ex- return to the provinces they allegedly migrated from, while ploitation and trafficking. others have been told to move to transitional sites. Many, however, have expressed concern about the remoteness Right to return of some of the sites, which separates them from their tradi- At least half of those still displaced face obstacles to tional livelihoods. Indigenous Badjaos who make their living their return, either because their homes are in “no return” as fishermen and seaweed farmers are particularly affect- areas or because it is unclear whether they will be eligi- ed and have asked to be allowed to return to their homes. ble for housing assistance. They include ethnic Tausug originally from Sulu province, ethnic Yakan from Basilan The relocation process has been criticised for failing and indigenous Badjaos from Tawi-Tawi, all of whom are to adhere to international standards, with reports that Muslims. Many had been living in the barangays - the some IDPs have been pressured into accepting the move smallest administrative division in the Philippines – of Rio and that others have not been properly consulted. Many Hondo, Mariki and Barangay IV, where the government are also worried that what is presented as a temporary has declared large areas unsafe and forbidden return solution will become a permanent one.3 until reconstruction is complete. 2 UNHCR profiling of IDPs, June 2014 1 Philippine Star, Death toll among Zamboanga siege evacuees hits 3 HRW, Philippines: Protect Zamboanga’s Displaced Minorities, 30 167, 2 September 2014 April 2014 Workshop report | Durable Solutions in Zamboanga 5 Housing, land and property National and international response IDPs’ lack of formal land ownership or tenancy documents is important to address, because without such paperwork The Zamboanga city government is in charge of the re- many risk being excluded from both humanitarian and sponse to IDPs’ needs. The Crisis Management Com- permanent housing assistance. The city government’s mittee (CMC) led the initial emergency response, and in Z3R recovery plan, in the meantime, focuses largely on December 2013 the City Disaster Risk Reduction Man- physical reconstruction, and neglects the issues of eco- agement Council (CDRRMC) took over for the recovery nomic recovery and compensation for lost property. and rehabilitation phase. The city authorities submitted their 3.5 billion peso ($75.5 million) Z3R plan to the central The basis on which the government has declared “no government for approval at the end of December 2013, build” or “no return” zones in areas it considers protected with an emphasis on “building Zamboanga back better”. or at high risk of flooding is contested.4 It argues a) that Implementation, however, has been repeatedly delayed, people should not be allowed to return to places where in part because of difficulties in identifying available land mangrove swamps might be damaged, but such areas suitable for resettlement. One year after the conflict, it are not officially designated as protected; b) that people is estimated that only 189 permanent homes have been should not be allowed to return to places prone to flood- built.5 ing, but while geo-hazard maps confirm these areas are at risk – along with large areas of Zamboanga city centre The Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) has tasked UN- - previous recommendations have been to mitigate the HCR and the UN Development Programme (UNDP) with danger rather than prevent people from living there; and leading the development of a durable solutions strategy c) that people should not be allowed to return to areas for Zamboanga. At the time of IDMC’s workshop, it was that require the construction of bases for security forces in the process of being finalised and HCT was still to to prevent future MNLF