International legal standards emphasize that return is a fundamental right,<sup>42</sup> as well as one of the pathways to achieving a durable solution for IDPs,<sup>43</sup> and establishes that states may not restrict the right to return except on the relatively narrow grounds of ‘national security, public order, public health or morals, or the rights and freedoms of others,’ and only when such restrictions are appropriate, proportionate, and established by law.<sup>44</sup> Generating the confidence of IDPs requires more than a rights-based peace agreement; IDPs need to feel convinced that that their security, rights, and freedoms will be guaranteed following return, otherwise the mere existence of a peace agreement is unlikely to lead to a durable solution.<sup>45</sup> As such, the process by which an agreement is negotiated, designed and implemented will determine whether – and which – IDPs are willing or able to return home, and under what conditions.<sup>46</sup> That is to say, the ‘who, what, and how’ of each agreement is vital to its success and must be tailored to each context.<sup>47</sup> Scholars stress the importance of engaging displaced persons in all levels of a multi-track peace process: in ‘track-one,’ which involves official government diplomacy;<sup>48</sup> ‘track-two,’ which involves conflict resolution specialists, private citizens, non-governmental organizations or businesses; and ‘track-three,’ which refers to unofficial interventions at the grassroots.<sup>49</sup> The scholarship also recognizes there may be times when direct participation of IDPs in one or all of these tracks may be undesirable or impossible, due to insurmountable barriers to participation, if participation entails risks for the displaced, or when the absence of democratic structures to elect IDP leaders means that IDP interests are compromised. In situations where it is not possible to include Migration Online; Leckie, S. d. (2003), _Returning Home: Housing and Property Restitution Rights of Refugees and Displaced Persons,_ Transnational Publishers, pp. 15-16.

42 The right to return is founded enshrined by the right to return is Article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which protects liberty of movement and the freedom to choose one’s own residence. See: W Kälin, Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement: Annotations (rev edn, American Society of International Law and Brookings–Bern Project on Internal Displacement 2008) at 126, 129–30.

43 Principle 28 of the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement states that IDPs ‘have the right to choose freely between return, local integration or resettlement.’ See: Francis Deng, _Compilation and Analysis of Legal Norms, Part II: Legal Aspects Relating to the Protection Against Arbitrary Displacement_ , U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1998/53/Add.2 (11 February 1998). 44 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (adopted 16 December 1966, entered into force 23 March 1976) 999 UNTS 171 at Article 12(3). See also: UN Human Rights Committee, ‘General Comment No 27: Article 12 (Freedom of Movement)’ (2 November 1999) UN Doc CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add9.

> 45 Purkey A. (2016) _Justice, reconciliation, and ending displacement: Legal empowerment and refugee engagement in transitional processes_ , Refugee Survey Quarterly, 35, 1-25.

> 46 Fagen, P.W. (2009). _Peace processes and IDP solutions_ . Refugee Survey Quarterly, 28(1), pp.31-58.

47 Ruta, C., Ruaudel, H. and Bongard, P. (2018). The Guiding Principles and armed non-State actors. Forced Migration Review, (59), pp.37-39.

48 Examples of direct IDP participation in track-one peace processes are rare, since they are typically difficult to access and displaced persons are further disadvantaged by lack of resources, education, political skills or influence, and the lack of a formal interlocutor to support their rights. See: Brookings Institution, Addressing Internal Displacement in Peace Processes, Peace Agreements and Peace-Building, September 2007. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/06/2007_peaceprocesses.pdf 49 IDPs have participated in track-two initiatives in a number of settings, joining a broader coalition that can offer them greater leverage, and also in track-three process that aim to resolve conflict and encourage reconciliation at the community level, and thereby support IDP return. See: Cohen, R. and Deng, F. (1998) Masses in Flight, Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press, p.259 8