Preventing internal displacement: conciliating land conflicts in Guatemala

Abstract

One of the most challenging issues present in post-conflict societies is the design of national mechanisms to resolve disputes which arise when displaced persons return to their place of origin, or resettle in a new area, and are confronted by persons laying claim to the same land. Given that one of the common sources of forced migration is conflict erupting from land disputes, it is important to assess which strategies the State and the international community may select in order to prevent a new cycle of violence and displacement Beginning from the premise that internal flight is often linked to a breakdown or complete absence of effective conflict resolution procedures, the goal is to consider the adoption of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures which may be based on an amalgamation of traditional conciliation and modem ADR norms. The linkage between customary norms and state practice serves to join the previously polarized legal systems in order to establish a sense of unity within the legal structure of the nation. In a sense, the basic legal infrastructure for the establishment of a viable nation-state based on a sense of community has proved deficient This problem is heightened by the fact that much of the progress being made in the creation of international law on this issue tends to focus on substantive rights, without much attention being given to procedural guarantees. Hence this may weaken implementation of any protection granted to the internally displaced. Therefore, any attempts to devise a preventive framework in this arena should include procedural standards in order to uphold substantive rights and equity concerns1. Brief comparison with the Land Claims Court of South Africa, the Mexican Office for Conciliation and Arbitration of Land Conflicts, and the Property Commission in Bosnia is included.