Challenges for the implementation of the right to education of forcibly displaced children in North-East, Nigeria

Published on March 11, 2021
Olanike ADELAKUN | genida

Conflict induced internal displacement has caused over 2 million to be homeless across Nigeria with over 80% of the displaced population being women and children – with children accounting for the larger part of this population. While there appears to be a strong institutional framework to protect internally displaced persons (IDPs) in Nigeria, the legal framework on which the institutions could thrive is relatively weak. The lack of a uniform approach in ensuring access to education among the displaced and nondisplaced calls for a proactive measure on the part of the Nigerian government in providing compulsory and free basic education to all children of school age without any form of discrimination on the societal status of the children

HOW TO CONTRIBUTE

Researching Internal Displacement publishes engaging and insightful short pieces of writing, artistic and research outputs, policy briefings and think pieces on internal displacement.

We welcome contributions from academics, practitioners, researchers, officials, artists, poets, writers, musicians, dancers, postgraduate students and people affected by internal displacement.

By Adam Lichtenheld and Abbey Steele | Mar 26, 2026
This is the fourth volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’. It examines how state policies addressing internal displacement have evolved since the Cold War, analysing 588 policies across 86 countries adopted between 1989 and 2022. The authors find that policy adoption surged during the peak of the liberal international order, particularly in the 2000s and 2010s, driven by major displacement crises, international advocacy, and normative frameworks like the 1998 UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement, the 2006 Kampala Convention, and the IASC Durable Solutions Framework. While most countries address displacement through broader vulnerable population frameworks, the content of IDP-specific policies has shifted over time. Provisions establishing camps and granting formal IDP status have declined since 2018, whereas service provision guarantees expanded dramatically between 2003 and 2018, likely reflecting state-building efforts in conflict-affected nations. As the liberal international order weakens, the authors question whether policy adoption will slow without international pressure and normative consensus, while suggesting that existing policies may serve as valuable tools for domestic advocates to hold governments accountable.
By Deborah Casalin | Mar 23, 2026
This is the third volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’. It argues that in the face of escalating pressures on international cooperation, resources and norms – which in turn aggravate the situation of IDPs and their societies – it is crucial to keep consolidating the internal displacement legal regime, as well as strengthening and building on it further to address the growing and evolving challenges of internal displacement situations. The first part outlines some features of the internal displacement legal regime which may be leveraged to safeguard existing progress. These include its foundations in international human rights law and international humanitarian law; its multi-level anchoring; and its broad contextual relevance. The second part indicates some ways in which this legal regime can be reinforced and developed in the longer term: in particular, by consolidating existing protections at different levels; clarifying and further elaborating norms where needed; and gathering and analysing relevant legal data to track evolution and application of the internal displacement legal regime, as well as how this may still need to develop.
By Geoff Gilbert | Mar 19, 2026
This second volume in our series on ‘Internal Displacement in a Changing World Order’ considers whether the global policy framework of the 2018 Global Compact on Refugees (GCR) adequately addresses the situation of internally displaced persons (IDPs). The GCR was designed by states participating in the Formal Consultations hosted by UNHCR to be limited to 1951 Convention refugees. Nevertheless, there are some express references in the GCR to internally displaced persons and forced internal displacement. Furthermore, the nature of acute crises globally is that in many instances there is both cross-border and internal displacement within one state with mixed populations, such that the GCR’s explicit inclusion of ‘host communities’ incorporates IDPs in the GCR. This means that both expressly and implicitly, IDPs need also to be factored into GCR work ‘to operationalize the principles of burden- and responsibility-sharing to better protect and assist refugees and support host countries and communities’.