term ‘refugee’ denotes an individual who has fled under similar circumstances but has crossed an international border, either once or more. The reality remains that under this mask of “IDP” status are civilians, the majority being women and children, who have been forced to leave their homes due to conflict, however there are several categories under which IDPs can fall, such as natural disasters – earthquakes, floods and the recent and rare event of the 2004 tsunami.
Whilst the numbers of IDPs in the world out-number the number of refugees by 2:1, the very plight of IDPs receives far less attention, whether it be international media coverage or the protection of the most basic of human rights, which are still to be afforded to people who are internally displaced, if not more stringently advocated for.
Whilst the root causes to internal displacement are essential to recognize, the path to end internal displacements stands even more poignantly at our feet as individuals pursuing a humanitarian cause and in recognizing the human right of every human being. Most are familiar with the depressing conditions that most IDPs face globally in terms of security, livelihoods, education, health and status. Where national governments and humanitarian bodies are responding to the needs of IDPs in camps, issues arise when activities to support and assist IDPs are delayed; access for humanitarian bodies and other actors is hindered and where those who have demonstrated commitments to assist fail to complete or fulfill these commitments.
Hence IDPs are forced to live in very precarious conditions and in such circumstances there has often been a call for national governments and rebel forces (where applicable) to adhere and recognize the fundamental tenets of international human rights and international humanitarian law and to address prevailing impunities. 
Amidst conflict it remains the responsibility of the national governments to ensure that it adheres to its obligation to 

protect and secure the life of both IDPs and other civilians, irrespective of ongoing conflict and hostilities. However in several countries tarnished by conflict, the reality of the circumstances is that amongst the main perpetrators of abuse are the national authorities, if not condoning displacement.
Yet the absence of armed conflict does not always result in political stability and the will to resolve outstanding displacement situations. Many IDPs linger for years in miserable conditions with very little idea of their futures. The lack of responsible authorities to actively seek durable solutions to their return home and sustained livelihood will only serve to keep them under these circumstances.

Protection 

Protection is largely seen as an invisible ‘pillar’ of humanitarian action; under international law humanitarian bodies seek to uphold the security of all beings yet this is often in accordance with protection strategies or mechanisms drawn up by individuals agencies, and hence they monitor their responsibility in implementing those strategies accordingly. Protection aspects and rights issues usually transpire through reference to specific abuses and so forth.
With various international laws and legal policies in place, none however serve to emphasise or call for overall minimum standards of protection in humanitarian activities. Standards of protection would potentially move away from temporary and transitional forms of protection and instead would place the rights of people at the centre of a broader development context in the given countries. It must be noted that the quality of protection should not be measured against the numbers of returnees and resettlement, as protection should be secured at all phases of assistances as well as post-assistance.