Khassim Diagne initiated the dinner discussion by explaining that there has been very little research done on protracted IDP situations in Africa. In his presentation he focused on three areas: the causes responsible for creating protracted IDP situation In Africa, the consequences and the possible solutions. According to current estimates, around 24.5 million people have been displaced due to conflict-induced displacement. Countries with the highest number of IDPs are Sudan (5m), Uganda (1.7m) and DRC (1.1m).  Other situations include Cote d’Ivoire (700,000), Somalia (400,000) and Chad (150,000).
Civil wars, inter-communal violence or government repressions are some of the causes of protracted displacement situation in Africa. Intense ethnic and communal violence in Burundi, DRC, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Chad have led to high levels of organized violence and destruction. Vested economic interests by various parties support continuation of armed conflict.
Some of the major visible consequences of the protracted IDP situation are destabilizing effects on regional security, material deprivation, idleness, despair and low self worth, social tension and violence, dependency syndrome, passive recipients of assistance, perception of burden, resentment and hostility, discrimination based on being an IDP, lack of adequate housing and lack of protection of property left behind. These consequences vary from region to region and are case specific. Employers are skeptic about employing IDPs in their jobs. They are also discriminated in other welfare schemes specially access to health and education due to lack of documentation.  
There are three possibilities to resolve the protracted IDP situation. Firstly, and the most preferred is return to communities of origin. Second possible solution would be integration in host communities; given the considerable time that IDPs have spent in the area of displacement. Local integration process should encourage economic self-reliance in 

which the role of development agencies and bodies are crucial.  Relocation and integration elsewhere in the country could be another way of dealing with the protracted IDP situation.
He concluded his presentation by pointing out the role of the national actors. Since the IDPs fall under the jurisdiction of national actors it is important that the national actors devise legal mechanisms which make them accountable and safeguard rights of the internally displaced persons. There should be special advocacy efforts with a special focus on women and children. The international community should be committed. He suggested cluster approach to improve humanitarian response. 
Most of the discussion revolved around if “durable” solutions are possible in case of protracted displacement; speacially feasibility of the right to return. Some of the participants also wanted to know if there are available best practices, which could be adopted. UNHCR’s work in Colombia was suggested as one of the possible models to learn from. Through Joint Technical Unit created in 1999 Government of Colombia is provided with technical advice on IDP policy. UNHCR in this case closely works with state institutions like registry office which provide identification documents. UNHCR Colombia also has taken several initiatives in collaboration with other organizations to empower the IDPs specially through legal aid clinics.

Roundtable on “Protection Regimes – International and National” (6 December 2007) 

In this roundtable discussion, Khassim Diagne focused on the role of UNHCR in the protection of internally displaced persons. M.S. Yadav spoke about the role of National Human Rights Commission, India and Patrick Hoenig tried to look at how the international and national regimes have created protection