REFUGEES FROM GENERATION TO GENERATION UNHCR, APRIL 2023 In DRC, the security situation in both in North and South Kivu remains very tense, with conflict among different non-state actors, between state armed forces and non-state armed groups, and with interethnic tensions over access to land and other resources. Both non-state armed groups and the various branches of the state security forces extort money from civilians at checkpoints and elsewhere, especially if ID documents are expired. Government authority is limited in some areas. Refugees face the same insecurity as the host communities in eastern DRC, but have specific risks because of their refugee status. Focus group participants reported that men may be subject to arbitrary detention by the Congolese police or army, on suspicion of being members of non-state armed groups; or to forced recruitment by these armed groups. Women are vulnerable to rape and sexual assault, and to early marriage and the sale and exchange of sex. In North Kivu, it was alleged by focus group participants that non-state armed groups have forcibly repatriated some refugees to Rwanda. Access to land is difficult, although refugees are permitted to rent land and even to buy it in some areas. Refugees expressed the view that the assistance available to them had reduced and was insufficient. Refugees of Congolese origin in Rwanda who participated in focus groups primarily noted difficulties in gaining access to work, especially if they lacked identity documents. Only a small minority expressed interest in acquiring Rwandan citizenship, and there was a lack of knowledge of procedures and requirements. In Uganda, long-term refugees in Uganda complained that food rations were not sufficient to feed families; and had reduced compared to those issued to new arrivals, on the basis that they were expected by now to be self-sufficient. At the same time, however, the increasing subdivision of plots as new refugees arrived meant that land allocated was insufficient to produce enough food to eat through farming. They also reported insufficient boreholes, especially in Kiryandongo, leading to conflicts over water supplies. Refugees are not permitted to build permanent structures on settlement land, and the quality of housing and shelter is poor. Although the right of refugees to work is broadly supported in law and policy, access to formal employment is difficult, and self -employment also hindered by lack of recognition of qualifications issued in the country of origin. Refugees in Uganda also reported being unable to meet costs of education for their children as well as pay for food – even though there are no tuition fees for primary education, there are other costs, including uniform and parent-teacher association dues. While there are health centres in the settlements, the cost of medicines was a challenge, as well as transportation of emergency medical cases to the health centres and hospitals. The lack of economic security also leads families to split up, as fathers have abandoned families that they cannot support. The elderly, child-headed households, and those with special needs are particularly vulnerable. Some refugees engage in the sale or exchange of sex or petty crime as a consequence. Personal security and security of property were both compromised, whether through generalised criminality, or in relation to reprisals from former enemies in the country of origin (especially in case of South Sudan). Conflict between farmers and livestock herders has been a problem in Nakivale, although there have been successful efforts to mediate such disputes before they escalate. Preferred solutions Unsurprisingly, when asked about preferred solutions for their legal status, most refugees expressed the desire for resettlement in North America or Europe. Nonetheless, 45 percent overall expressed the desire to remain in the country of asylum whether as a refugee (22 percent), as a citizen (12 percent), or with a permanent residence status (12 percent). Reflecting the much greater sense of connection to the country of asylum, only 7.5 percent expressed the wish to return to the country of origin. In relation to the desire to acquire citizenship, this option was most popular in DRC, where 23 percent of those interviewed expressed a preference for citizenship of the country of asylum, and another 20 percent would prefer a permanent residence status. The percentages were much lower in the other two countries: in Uganda 6 percent would prefer citizenship, and another 10 percent permanent residence; in Rwanda, only 1 percent among those surveyed stated that they would prefer citizenship and another 1 percent a permanent residence status. 26