A/79/317 (f) Administrative set-up. Necessary bureaucratic processes and bodies must be established and staffed. 48. Inclusive, respectful and participatory planning is essential during all of these steps, which significantly enhances the success of all forms of resettlement. 49. Transparency and the right to information. Resettlement projects often face issues due to secrecy and a lack of transparency, which hampers public access to crucial information. This lack of information, including scientific and expert data, restricts the participation of affected communities in decision-making and proposing alternatives. Even when standards for public dialogue exist, the absence of credible, timely and transparent information on resettlement action plans often undermines the effective participation of affected communities. 50. Rights to remain, return, resettlement and site choice. Project design and planning must start with an honest discussion about whether the community can remain in place, return if it is forcibly displaced or be resettled to a different site. If resettlement is unavoidable or requested by the affected community, it must be recognized as having the right to resettlement, which includes compensation, livelihood restoration and integration assistance. 51. Free, prior and informed consent, meaningful and respectful consultations, and participation. Research consistently shows that displaced people achieve better outcomes when properly consulted with respect and given control over their futures. However, participation is often tokenistic, and millions of people, in particular those in informal settlements or rural areas, continue to be excluded from resettlement processes. 43 Inadequate dialogue and negotiations during the design and development of resettlement schemes have led to significant human rights violations, as detailed in previous communications and reports (see, for example, A/HRC/55/53). 44 52. Examples of inadequate participation. Instances of poor participation in resettlement planning are common. For example, Saudi authorities planned the resettlement of the Huwaytat tribe for the Neom project without proper consultation or free, prior and informed consent, resulting in the use of lethal force, detentions and terrorism charges to suppress opposition. 45 53. While stakeholder participation is part of all development finance institution safeguards, the right to remain is not guaranteed. For example, IFC performance standards require effective consultation based on project risks and impacts but allow involuntary resettlement where it is minimized and adverse impacts are mitigated. Although forced evictions are generally prohibited, exceptions are allowed if conducted according to national law and IFC performance standard requirements. Most institutions, such as IFC, do not require a specific assessment of the “willingness” of sellers or the vulnerabilities and discrimination faced by project-affected peoples, or factor in that Governments or private sector actors may exert pressure to compel a sale. 46 Interestingly, the African Development Bank requires a signed consent form, free of threats or reprisals, as evidence of meaningful consultation and negotiation before approving the borrower’s resettlement action plan. 47 __________________ 43 44 45 46 47 14/24 Yan Tan, “Development-induced displacement and resettlement: an overview of issues and interventions”, in Routledge Handbook of Migration and Development, Tanja Bastia and Ronald Skeldon, eds. (London, Routledge, 2020). See also communications OTH 24/2021, OTH 17/2022, OTH 133/2022 and AL OTH 99/2023. See communications SAU 11/2020 and SAU 2/2023 and related letters. OHCHR, Benchmarking Study of Development Finance Institutions’ Safeguard Policies. African Development Bank, “Borrower guidance note for E&S operational safeguard 5: land acquisition, restrictions on access to land and land use, and involuntary resettlement”, 2024. Available at www.afdb.org/sites/default/files/borrower_guidance_note_for_os5.pdf . 24-15075