Protection Assessment
in Libya
21 March 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Disclaimer
The assessment reached 29 neighbourhoods and villages in the districts of Benghazi and Tripoli. The findings represent an
account of the humanitarian situation only in the assessed areas. The report should be interpreted in conjunction with other
assessment or media reports.
The assessment has been carried out by OCULUS Team Ltd., on behalf of Save the Children International and Handicap
International.
Cover photo: Halima (16 yrs) is living with her family in an abandoned pump station in the outskirts of Benghazi. She has
not been to school for two years. © Wolfgang Gressmann, January 2015
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Timeline of Key Events-Libya Crisis
(JULY 2015-JANUARY 2016)
H U M A N I TA R I A N D E V E L O P M E N T
MAIN EVENTS
2015
J U LY
AUG
SEPT
OCT
21 July Clashes
between Tuareg
and Toubou
tribes in Sabha,
southern Libya,
left 40 dead and
four wounded
11 Aug IS launched
an offensive to
retake Derna while
new round of talks
resumed in Geneva
21 Sept The
UN announced
the finalisation
of the peace
agreement,
awaiting
signature from
both parties
5 Oct The House
of Representitive
extended its own
term beyond 20
October, without
specifying an end
date
17 Aug Clashes
broke out in Sirte
between IS and
armed residents. IS
reportedly shelled
parts of the city
and beheaded 12
opponents.
30 Aug New fighting
broke out between
Libyan National Army
and IS affiliated
groups in Benghazi,
killing four and
wounding six.
IOM reported that
more than 400
died trying to reach
Europe from Libya
in August. A total
of 300,000 people
have tried to cross
Mediterranean in
2015, 2,373 were
believed to have
died in the attempt.
Multi-Sector
Needs
Assessment
Source: OCULUS Team, March 2016
26 Sept
New fighting
between IS
and the LNA
broke out in the
Saberi district
of Benghazi.
19-23 Oct 12 people
killed and 39 injured
in a missile attack
on demonstration
in Benghazi. Five
people killed in a
separate attack on
Al Jalaa hospital,
Benghazi
27 Oct A helicopter
carrying Libya Dawn
military officials was
shot down, killing 19
The mandate
of the United
Nations Support
Mission in
Libya was
extended for
6 months until
15 March 2016
UNICEF
reported that
more than
half of schoolaged IDPs and
returnees in
the east of the
Libya do not
attend school.
60% of hospitals
were closed or
inaccessible at least
once due to the
conflict between April
and October 2015.
IMC Health Facility
Assessment
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
NOV
DEC
8 Nov Two Serbian
embassy staff abducted
in Sabratha by GNC
related militias
16 Dec Clashes
between armed
residents and Ansar
al-Sharia (al-Qaeda
affiliated group)
killing 11 people in Aj
dabiya.
3 Nov The oil-exporting
port of Zueitine (run by
Tripoli) was shut down
by forces loyal to HoR
government.
12 Nov Peace
agreement signed by
Zawiya and Wershafana
tribes in western Libya;
and by Tebu and Tuareg
tribes in southern Libya
14 Nov IS's leader in
Libya Abu Nabil killed in
US airstrike
However, fighting in
Ubari continues, despite
the ceasefire signed
between Tebu and
Tuareg tribes
25 Nov Tunisia closed
its border with Libya,
following a suicide
bombing in Tunis clained
by IS
17 Dec Libyan
parties signed
a UN-brokered
peace deal to form
a Government of
National Accord.
However, the leaders
of both groups have
denied the legitimacy
of the signatories.
It is reported that
600 displaced
households in
sites near Ubari in
southern Libya face
severe food
shortages
2016
JAN
7 Jan 56 killed
and 100 injured by
two suicide bombs
in Zliten, (170km
east of Tripoli).
IS has claimed
responsibility,
alongside attacks
on the oil ports of Es
Sider and Ras Lanuf
25 Jan Libya's HoR
parliament reject a
unity government
proposed under a
U.N.-backed plan to
resolve the country's
political crisis and
armed conflict
First round of IOM's
Displacement
Tracking Mechanism
released
Between 23 and
25 February three
persons were killed
and five others
were injured by
mines among
returnees in Al-Leithi
neighbourhood.
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
1
Abbreviations
2
A. Executive Summary
3
B. Introduction
9
C. Conflict Impact
13
Key Findings
13
Priority InterventionsTotal Population in Need
15
Humanitarian Profile in Benghazi
16
Socio-Demographic Context
16
Vulnerabilities and Specific Needs
17
Displacement Patterns and Dynamics
21
Livelihoods and Food Security
25
D. Protection Needs and Access to Services
29
Main Protection Issues
31
Access to Information
37
E. Formal and Informal Protection Mechanisms
39
Key Findings
39
Recommendations
40
Protection Mechanisms
40
F. Humanitarian Assistance and Access
43
Key Findings
43
Recommendations
44
Priority Needs and Needs Coverage
44
Humanitarian Access
47
Annexes
50
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Abbreviations
FSL
HC
HHs
HI
Food Security and Livelihoods
Host Communities
Households
Handicap International
IDPs
Internally Displaced Persons
IMC
International Medical Corps
INGO
International Non-governmental Organisation
IS
Islamic State
KI
Key Informant(s)
LNGO
MAG
MSNA
Local Non-governmental Organisation
Mine Action Group
Multi-Sector Needs Assessment
NFIs
Non-food Items
NGO
Non-governmental Organisation
PiN
SDR
SGBV
UN
People in Need (for humanitarian assistance)
Secondary Data Review
Sex and Gender Based Violence
United Nations
USD
United States Dollar
UXO
Unexploded Ordnance
WASH
ERW
SALW
Water, Sanitation and Hygiene
Explosive Remnants of War
Small Arms and Light Weapons
MARCH 2016
Page 3
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
A. Executive Summary
FIGURES:
Figure 1: % of people interviewed by group and severity category
Summary of Findings
More than 60% of households were aware of
relief agencies sending staff to their community
to ask about their needs, but often without any
assistance to follow, or access to feedback
mechanisms with regards to assistance
received. Consequently, the interviewed
population often lacks trust in relief actors
assessing needs and builds up frustration with
regards to their ability to access aid.
The PAL findings highlight a remarkably
different situation between Tripoli and
Benghazi. In Tripoli, people facing unmet
needs are nearly always IDPs. In Benghazi
where the conflict intensified in the last
months, both residents and displaced
population face unmet needs. The majority
of respondents in Benghazi anticipate a clear
deterioration in the coming three months.
Benghazi rural
Benghazi urban
Quantity (36%) and quality (13%) of
aid is reported as insufficient to cover
current needs as stated by almost half of
the interviewed households. 48% of the
assessed households have not received any
humanitarian assistance although they face
needs, while some 40% did not report to be
in need. 24% of the households report that
aid is irregular, particularly in Tripoli. There,
10% of households report that they were
impeded from accessing services by “powerful
groups”. In Benghazi, the main challenge
to humanitarian access is lack of freedom
of movement, including lack of transport
to access aid, lack of documentation and
movement restrictions.
IDPs show significantly more severe needs than residents, especially in Tripoli
(severity scale from 0: normal conditions to 50: severe conditions)...
Tripoli urban
The recent conflict in Libya resulted in intense
fighting and triggered continuous displacement
of population in major cities of the country.
The PAL estimates that 70% of IDPs in Tripoli
are in need (43% among them facing acute
needs). In Benghazi, findings show that 86% of
the IDPs are in need (nearly 50% facing acute
needs) and 80% of the residents (15% in acute
need).
Page 4
The population groups considered most at risk
of protection issues are, in order of priority:
1. IDP families
2. Refugees and migrants from outside Libya
3. Residents hosting IDPs
Among the displaced populations, key
informants in Benghazi (no data for Tripoli)
report that the most affected population groups
are, in order of priority:
1. IDPs in rented houses
2. IDPs in public buildings (schools, mosques)
3. IDPs hosted by relatives
FIGURES:
Figure 2: % of interviewed households expecting ‘worse’ or ‘much worse’ living
conditions in the next 3 months (HH interviews)
With the same level of assistance already being provided, more than half of
the households (56%) anticipate their situation to further deteriorate in the
upcoming 3 months...
%%HHs
HHsexpecting
expectingworse
worseorormuch
muchworse
worse
conditions
conditionsinin3 3months
months
Al-Kwayfiya
Al-Kwayfiya
1
1-2
2 - 20
211 - 0
- 40
4 40
411 - 60
6 60
611 81 - 880
81 - 0
- 1100
00
Main Affected Target Groups
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Hay
Hay
al-Mukhtar
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Al-Sabri
Al-Thawra
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
al-Shabiyah
Sidi
Sidi
Abayd
Abayd
Excluded
Excluded
BuBu
Atni
Atni
Shuhadaa
Shuhadaa
Sidi
Sidi
al-Salawi
al-Salawi
Al-Salmani
Hsayn
Hsayn Al-Salmani
Al-Uruba
Al-Uruba
Raas
Abayda
Raas
Abayda
SidiSidi
Main Vulnerable Persons
Madinat
Madinat
Benghazi
Benghazi
BuBu
Atni
Atni
According to key informants in Benghazi, the
age group considered the most at risk are, in
priority order:
The person with specific vulnerabilities
identified as the most at risk, in priority order:
Al-Hawari
Al-Hawari
Al-Berka
Al-Berka
Al-Keesh
Al-Keesh
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Magziha
Al-Magziha
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Fuwayhat
Garyounis
Garyounis
Al-Nawagiya
Al-Nawagiya
Bu-Fakhra
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hawari
Al-Hawari
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
Bu-Fakhra
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
% HHs expecting worse or much worse
conditions in 3 months
% HHs expecting worse or much worse
conditions in 3 months
Shuhada
Gargaresh Arriada Damoun
Abu
Salim
Downtown
Mansoura
Not asssessed
Downtown
Mansoura
Not asssessed
Shuhada
Gargaresh Arriada Damoun
Abu
Salim
Janzour
1. Female head of households (16% of
interviewed households)
2. Persons with disabilities (3.4% of the
population assessed)
3. The chronically ill (7% of the population
assessed)
Benina
Benina
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
1. Older persons (60+ years old, 8.3% of the
population assessed
2. Children under 5 years old, 24% of the
population assessed
3. Women (18-59 years old), 22.5% of the
population assessed
Benghazi
Benghazi
al-Jadida
al-Jadida
Al-Kwayfiya
Al-KwayfiyaKhalifa
Khalifa
Dahra
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Tajoura
Sidi
Salim
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Hadhba
Sherqia
Tajoura
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Hadhba
Sherqia
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Janzour
Dahra
Sidi
Salim
Ain Zara
Ain Zara
Figure 3: % of household members with specific needs (HH interviews)
14% of household members report specific needs and vulnerabilities...
Page 5
The most common disability reported is
physical and permanent disability (not due
to the conflict) and can be found in higher
proportions in urban Tripoli (2.57%). Conflictrelated disabilities are more frequent in rural
Benghazi (2.2%) when compared to urban
Benghazi (0.6%) or urban Tripoli (1%). Mental
disabilities, visual, speech and hearing
impairment are found more frequently in urban
Tripoli when compared to Benghazi.
FIGURES:
Figure 4: % of household in need (HH interviews, Tripoli: only IDPs)
42% of visited households in Benghazi are in 'moderate need' for humanitarian
assistance...
% of population in moderate needs
% of population in moderate needs
Excluded
HayHay
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Al-Sabri
Excluded
al-Mukhtar
Sidi
Abayd
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
Sidi
Abayd
Sidi
Hsayn
Sidi
Hsayn
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya KhalifaAl-Hawari
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Al-Salmani
Al-Keesh
Benina
Al-Quwarsha
Bu Atni
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Shuhadaa
Raas Abayda al-Salawi
Al-Salmani
Madinat
Benghazi
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Berka
Garyounis
Al-Nawagiya
Main Protection Needs
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
Al-Berka
Raas Abayda
Benina
Al-Magziha
Bu Atni
Al-Hawari
Interviewed households consider the following
protection issues as the most important to
tackle, in order of priority:
Al-Kwayfiya
Al-Kwayfiya
1
31 3 0
41 4 0
51 5 0
-6
0
14% of the population reported facing specific
needs. IDPs families have higher levels of
vulnerability with 15% of their members facing
specific needs compared to 12% for residents.
Nearly 7% of all households interviewed
reported chronic illnesses or members facing
critical medical conditions, especially in Tripoli.
“ Landmine clearance and prevention was the
second most required intervention assessed
households requested across all assessed areas,
and ranked highest in urban Benghazi ”
1
11 10
21 2 0
31 3 0
41 4 0
1-5
511 - 1 0
1- 0
2 2600
“ The majority of household respondents
report symptoms of psychological distress
as a consequence of experienced protection
concerns, including the majority of children ”
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Keesh
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hadaa'iq
Bu Atni
Al-Uruba
Al-Uruba
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Al-Hawari
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Magziha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Fuwayhat
Garyounis
Al-Nawagiya
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hawari
Al-Quwarsha
32% of visited households in Benghazi are in 'acute need' for humanitarian
assistance...
Bu-Fakhra
About one quarter of all assessed households
feel not protected enough or completely
unprotected against violence, especially IDPs.
Female respondents feel less protected than
male respondents. Respondents in Tripoli feel
generally better protected than populations in
Benghazi.
% of population in immediate needs
% of population in immediate needs
Al-Thawra
21 2 0
31 3 0
41 4 0
51 5 0
-6
0
Sidi
al-Shabiyah
Al-Thawra
Sidi Abayd al-Shabiyah
Abayd
Sidi
Hsayn
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
The majority of household respondents
report symptoms of psychological distress
as a consequence of experienced protection
concerns, including the majority of children.
Hay
Hay
al-Mukhtar
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Al-Sabri
Excluded
Excluded
Al-Hawari
Benina
Sidi
Hsayn
Benina
Madinat
Benghazi
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Shuhadaa
Al-Salmani
al-Salawi
Raas Abayda
Al-Salmani
Raas Abayda
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Al-Hawari
Bu Atni
ERW contamination in Libya remains
extensive, but as yet unquantified, in all
conflict-affected areas. Between 23 and 25
February UNSMIL has received information
from Benghazi Medical Center (BMC) that
three persons were killed and five others were
injured among the returnees as the result of
mine explosions in Al-Leithi neighbourhood.
Al-Kwayfiya
Al-Kwayfiya
1
11 10
21 2 0
31 3 0
41 4 0
15 50
111 1-0
- 60
1. Absence of justice and the breakdown of law
and order
2. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians
3. Housing, land or property related issues
(especially for IDPs)
4. Lack or loss of personal documents
Al-Berka
Al-Keesh
Al-Berka
Al-Hadaa'iq
Bu Atni
Al-Uruba
Al-Uruba
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Al-Magziha
Al-Keesh
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Nawagiya
Garyounis
Al-Fuwayhat
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Magziha
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Hawari
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Nawagiya
Bu-Fakhra
Garyounis
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hawari
Bu Atni
Page 6
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Given the high usage of crisis livelihood coping strategies, coupled with the high reliance on savings
and the very short period of time households are able to cope without external assistance, it is
likely that particularly IDPs will resort to using emergency livelihood coping strategies ”
% of IDPs in moderate needs
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
Tensions between population groups are
observed in Benghazi (no data for Tripoli),
especially in rural areas. The main reasons
are overcrowding of residential areas and
competition for limited resources.
22% of visited IDP households in Tripoli are in 'moderate need' for
humanitarian assistance...
% of IDPs in moderate needs
Downtown
Mansoura
Not asssessed
Not asssessed
Janzour
Janzour
Downtown
Abu
Dahra
Salim
Mansoura
Tajoura
Ain Zara
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Sidi
Salim
Tajoura
Ain Zara
32% of visited IDP households in Tripoli are in 'acute need' for humanitarian
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
Interviewed families allocate one-third of their
assistance...
expenditure to rent and housing, particularly
for IDP households and particularly in rural
Benghazi, where 77% of the IDPs are settled in
% of IDPs in immediate needs
rented housing at their own expense. Many are
facing eviction when they are unable to pay rent.
Consequently, shelter support is the mainForArc_IDP_Sev$.IMMPCGT
priority
% of IDPs in immediate needs
for IDPs, while health needs rank highest for
Not asssessed
residents, followed by food needs and protection.
In urban Benghazi, protection needs were
ForArc_IDP_Sev$.IMMPCGT
among the top three needs of the population,
Not asssessed
due to the significant impact the conflict has had
in the urban areas and limited access to basic
goods and services.
1
Downt.
Mansoura
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
Janzour
As Serraj
0
21 20
41 4 0
61 6 0
81 - 8
-10
00
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Abu
Salim
Downt.
Mansoura
Gargaresh Arriada
Janzour
Dahra
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Gargaresh Arriada
0
21 20
41 4 0
61 6 0
81 - 8
-10
00
Suq
HadhbaAl-Jum'a
Bab Ben Alkhdra
Ghasir
As Serraj
Gargaresh Arriada
Households across all assessed areas and
groups identified as priority needs:
Both residents and IDPs report to frequently
apply crisis livelihood coping strategies such as
selling productive assets or spending less money
on other needs than food. For IDP households,
such expenses include spending less money
on health and education needs. Given the high
usage of crisis livelihood coping strategies,
coupled with the high reliance on savings and
the very short period of time households report
to be able to cope and sustain expenditures
without external assistance, it is likely that
particularly IDP households will further resort to
using emergency livelihood coping strategies in
the upcoming months.
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Abu Sidi
SalimSalim
Main Humanitarian Needs
1. Shelter (especially for IDPs, incl. financial
assistance to pay rent)
2. Access to health
3. Food and Protection (same rank)
Dahra
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Gargaresh Arriada
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
Landmine clearance and prevention was the
second most required intervention assessed
households requested across all assessed
areas, and ranked highest in urban Benghazi,
after the request for a re-establishment of rule of
law. Prevention of trafficking ranked among the
top three priority interventions as expressed by
the assessed population.
FIGURES:
Figure 4: % of household in need (HH interviews, Tripoli: only IDPs)
Sidi
Salim
Abu
Salim
Hadhba
Dahra
Alkhdra
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Tajoura
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Ain Zara
Tajoura
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Sidi
Salim
Ain Zara
Page 7
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ None of the schools in Benghazi that are functional have
child protection mechanisms in place, and teachers
commonly lack the specialization to address protection
concerns ”
Service Providers
Access to sustained formal protection services continues
to be a major challenge for the population in need
due to ongoing conflicts and restricted movement. As
a consequence, people generally turn towards family
members and friends when they do not feel safe and seek
support. In rural areas as well as in areas that are exposed
to conflict the main protection mechanism are tribes and
local elites, in urban areas the court and justice system.
Available protection mechanisms are less accessible
in areas of Benghazi that witness sporadic fighting (no
data for Tripoli). None of the schools in Benghazi that are
functional have child protection mechanisms in place,
and teachers commonly lack the specialization to address
protection concerns.
IDPs are more inclined to request protection support
(taking their higher level of needs into account) when
compared to resident communities, and especially in rural
areas. One of the main reasons why people with protection
concerns do not turn towards service providers is that
available protection mechanisms are considered largely
inappropriate.
The breakdown of law and order in Libya is also severely
impacting the work of civil society organizations. Those
reporting on human rights violations are at risk.
Main Recommendations for
Humanitarian Programming
General
• Advocate for the establishment of rule of law and
freedom of movement as the main precondition to
ensure the protection of civilians
• Focus on supporting vulnerable populations with mental,
physical and permanent disabilities (especially in Tripoli),
and on physical disabilities caused by conflict (especially
in Benghazi)
• Promote participatory approaches in needs assessments
and targeting, communication with beneficiaries and
feedback mechanisms
• Always follow-up assessments with programme
interventions (in order to prevent assessment fatigue
of the affected populations and overlap between INGO
efforts)
Protection Programming
• Conduct ERW clearance activities and integrated risk
awareness training to reduce the likelihood of injury or
death by ERW and SALW, particularly in Benghazi
• Improve access to protection services, formal and
informal protection mechanisms, including community
based support
• Increase knowledge and awareness raising of
protection principles among social workers, parents,
teachers, community and religious leaders, as well as
doctors and nurses
• Conduct outreach to ensure mobilization in the
community is undertaken to ensure an effective
response to GBV victims, which continues to be underreported
• Expand psychosocial support services for children and
adolescents in schools through inclusive child friendly
spaces and training of specialized social workers.
Ensure available referrer mechanisms in place to
support identified critical cases)
• Map available protection services, incl. civil society
organisations, establishing referral mechanisms
• Build the capacity of formal and informal protection
service providers, including training of volunteers
(specifically, training on needs assessments and
targeting most vulnerable groups, and especially in
Tripoli)
• Provision of establishment of child protection
mechanisms at schools
• Provide specific (and discreet) support to agencies
working on SGBV
• Prioritize IDPs, especially women and children in rural
areas in humanitarian programming (Benghazi)
• Advocate for the protection and increased security of
service provider staff, and particularly of civil society
representatives and activists (especially in Tripoli)
Page 8
Cross-Cutting Interventions
• Reinforce the accountability of duty bearers, provide
capacity building and awareness-raising activities
• Support existing programmes by government and
civil society in providing training of doctors and social
workers to work with children and their parents
• Basic health support, especially for IDPs and in rural
areas
• Provide medical assistance to chronically ill patients as
a top health priority
• Financial assistance to IDPs for paying rent (keeping
do-not-harm principles into careful account) in order to
prevent emergency livelihood coping strategies
• Cash programming for IDPs and returnees, but also
vulnerable resident communities
• Health programmes and access to medicine, especially
for chronic diseases
• Consider the size of household in Benghazi (above
country level) in calculation of assistance per family
(hygiene kits, etc.)
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 9
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
B. Introduction
Background
Coverage
The overall purpose of the Protection Assessment
in Libya (in short: PAL) is to assess immediate and
midterm protection needs in Tripoli and Benghazi
geographical areas. The assessment covered both
Tripoli and Benghazi urban centres and their immediate
surroundings when accessible. The thematic scope of
the assessment includes:
The PAL obtained a sample of 992 household interviews
in the three geographical areas of Benghazi city (391
HHs), Benghazi rural (234 HHs) and Tripoli city (367
HHs). The percentage of IDPs households interviewed
constituted more than 50% of the sample in each area.
In addition, the PAL conducted key informant interviews
in urban areas of Tripoli and Benghazi (See Annex 3
Sampling plan).
• Overall situation
• General demographic information and trends
• Population movement and stability
• Protection needs and access to services
• Formal and informal protection mechanisms
• Humanitarian access, assistance and communication
• Priority needs and interventions
Methodology
The objectives of the assessment were met by
designing an analysis framework that guided data
collection and analysis and combining three research
methods: Secondary Data Review (SDR), Household
interviews (with IDPs and resident population) and Key
informant interviews with relief actor’s representatives in
Benghazi.
For the SDR, a systematic desk review was conducted
at the onset of the assessment in order to identify the
affected groups and main protection and sectoral issues.
Sectoral secondary data review allowed to refine the
PAL design and sampling and complemented the results
of the field data collection. The list of documents use for
secondary data review are available in Annex 2.
For the key informant interviews, a semi structured
interview template was developed in order to collect
main relief actor’s (humanitarian staff, activists, CSO
representatives, NGOs, etc.) perceptions and opinions
about protection priority concerns and main priorities.
For the face-to-face HH interviews, a structured
interview template was developed. Random sampling on
neighbourhood level was used to select households for
both displaced population and resident population.
Due to security constraints, only four neighbourhoods of
Tripoli were covered by key informant interviews, while
16 neighbourhoods in Benghazi were covered. Due
to the lack of completeness, the Tripoli key informants
interview were not used in this report.
Limitations
When reading the PAL, the following limitations should
be kept in mind:
Representativity: The sample was designed to allow
representativity at the geographical area level. For
Benghazi rural, the sample allows for 95% confidence
interval and 6.4% margin of error. For Benghazi urban,
the sample allows for 95% confidence interval and 4.9%
margin of error. For Tripoli urban, the sample allows for
95% confidence interval and 5.1% margin of error. The
assessment is moderately representative at the affected
group level, and between urban and rural settings (i.e.
the smallest sample of 112 for residents in Benghazi
rural allows for 95% confidence interval with a 9.2%
margin of error).
Gender: 24% of head of household interviewed were
female, ensuring a gender lens into the report but
not enough to be statistically representative at the
geographical level.
Page 10
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
“ The situation in Libya is quite dynamic, limiting the
timespan validity of the information contained in
this report. Results should be reinterpreted in the
light of future significant demographic changes ”
FIGURES:
Figure 5: Number of HH and people assessed (HH interviews)
Estimates of humanitarian population
figures: The population figures provided in
this report are estimates made on the ground
by enumerators and key informants and
compared to existing registration or beneficiary
lists, local knowledge or secondary data.
While these figures should not be considered
precise, they are considered an adequate
guide to programming and targeting of
geographical areas. Each population figure
collected has received a confidence level,
based on the number of key informants, the
degree of agreement between key informants
and the production of documentary evidence.
Confidence in figures was rated from 0 to 6,
where 0 is considered an unverified figure
and 6 a verified and highly trustworthy figure.
Only 39 records out of 237 received a low
confidence score of 0, 1 and 2.
Dynamics: The situation in Libya is quite
dynamic, limiting the timespan validity of the
information contained in this report. Results
should be reinterpreted in the light of future
significant demographic changes.
Coverage: No active conflict area was
assessed during the PAL. Particularly
in Benghazi where fighting is ongoing,
humanitarian situation in conflict area should
be considered more severe than in no conflict
area.
Figure 6: Assessed areas in Benghazi (KI and HH interviews)
Assessed
Al-Kwayfiya
Assessed
Excluded
Excluded
Rural
Al-Kwayfiya
Urban
Sidi
Abayd
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
Sidi
Hsayn
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Al-Salmani
Raas Abayda
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
Sidi
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Al-Hawari
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
Benina
Al-Hawari
Al-Magziha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Nawagiya
Al-Berka
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Benina
Al-Keesh
Al-Quwarsha
Garyounis
Garyounis
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
Bu-Fakhra
Sidi
Hsayn
Bu Atni
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Al-Salmani
Al-Uruba
Raas Abayda
Benghazi
al-JadidaAl-Berka
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Hawari
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Nawagiya
Bu Atni
Al-Thawra
Al-Uruba
al-Shabiyah
Al-Hadaa'iq Al-Keesh
Al-Magziha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Quwarsha
Hay
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Sidi
Abayd
Rural
Urban
Hay
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Hawari
Page 11
FIGURES:
Figure 7: Assessed areas in Tripoli (KI and HH interviews)
Timeframe
The PAL assessment was implemented
in January and February 2016. Field data
collection was implemented between 12-28
February 2016. Key milestones are presented
in the Gantt chart (Figure 8).
Recommendations for
Further Assessments
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Assessed
Assessed
Downtown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Downtown
Bab Ben
Mansoura
Gargaresh
Ghasir
Gargaresh Arriada Shuhada Hadhba
Arriada
Damoun Sherqia
Abu
Salim
Janzour
Janzour
As Serraj
Dahra Suq Al-Jum'a
Dahra Suq Al-Jum'a
Mansoura
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Shuhada Hadhba
Damoun Sherqia
Abu
Salim
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Hadhba
Alkhdra
T
Tajoura
Sidi Salim
Sidi Salim
Ain Zara
Ain Zara
To complement information gaps, the following
assessments focus and approach are
recommended:
Population data: In coordination with local
authorities and committees, neighbourhood
population data should be collected and
updated regularly in Tripoli and Benghazi,
including number and type of settlement for
IDPs (Humanitarian profile).
Damages to public and private infrastructure:
The level of destruction of both private and
public buildings and infrastructure should be
taken into consideration for future assessment
initiatives. A rapid damage assessment should
evaluate the resources required to rehabilitate
the damaged infrastructure.
Education assessment: It is necessary to
conduct an education assessment in Benghazi
to evaluate the state of education facilities and
their functioning.
Protection monitoring mechanisms should
be established in both cities to monitor
protection concerns and service delivery.
Figure 8: PAL milestones
W1
Desk review
Developing assessment methodology and tools
Training Field team
Field data collection (12-28 February)
Data cleaning and validation
Data analysis and report
Final Report, comments implemented
W2
W3
W4
W5
W6
Page 12
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
How to Read Charts
The questionnaire used in the PAL included
roughly 150 questions to KI and households.
Various types of questions were used. This
section provides guidance to the readers on
how to read and interpret each type of chart.
Ranking or preference questions: The
questions from which the ranking heat maps
are extracted always imply a preference,
based on top 3 ranking. The calculation is
derived from the theory of election systems,
the Borda count1 . The scale is ordinal and the
darker the cell colour background, the higher
the preference given to the item. While there
is a rank order in the numbers assigned to
the categories of the variable, the “distance”
between the preference levels is not equal or
known.
Note also that a “lower” ranking, demand,
priority or preference does not imply an
“absence of need”. It only means that other
items or interventions are requested first,
preferred or given more importance and that
the item does not qualify regularly in the top 3
preferences as expressed by the population.
Therefore, the heat maps display only the
most frequently mentioned “top 3” items.
1
The Borda count determines the most preferred items of an election
by giving each response a certain number of points corresponding to the
position in which it is ranked by each respondent. Once all preferences
have been counted, the item with the most points is determined as
the most preferred. See ACAPS Resources: http://www.acaps.org/
resourcescats/downloader/heat_maps_as_tools_to_summarise_
priorities/69
TYPE OF QUESTION
CALCULATION AND VISUAL OUTPUT
Ranking or preference
questions
Borda count in heatmaps
Multiple choices
Frequency count and % in heat
maps, bar chart or narrative
Single choice
Frequency count and % in heat
maps, bar chart or narrative
Severity scale
Ordinal values in Maps
Quantitative population
figures
Sum
RURAL
URBAN
Displaced families
Refugees and migrants from outside Libya
Residents hosting displaced families
Residents not hosting displaced families
Returnees
Page 13
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
C. Conflict Impact
Key Findings
• 2.44 million people are in need of some form of protection from violence, rights
violations, explosive remnants of war, forced recruitment and other forms of abuse,
1.3 million (55%) of which are women and children. 1.28 million people are estimated
to be food insecure, including 175,000 IDPs (HNO 2015)
• 250,000 refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants in Libya are subjected to harassment,
arbitrary detention, limited freedom of movement, and other human rights violations
(HNO 2015)
• A new wave of displacement started in Oct 2014, leading to regular displacements,
especially in Benghazi where daily arrivals are observed
• Key informants reported a total population of 364,183 people in Benghazi visited
neighbourhoods and close to 33,000 IDPs, 87% of them renting housing, are hosted
by non-relatives, or live in public buildings
• Significant household composition changes due to displacement and regrouping
strategies between relatives and household members in areas of conflict (Benghazi)
are reported. The average number of people under a same roof is 9 in rural Benghazi,
8 in urban Benghazi, and 5 in urban Tripoli.
• 19% of households are single-headed, among them 16% by single females
• 14% of the assessed population reported specific needs. IDPs families have higher
vulnerabilities with 15% of their members facing specific needs, compared to 12%
for residents. Nearly 7% of all households reported having chronically ill members or
facing critical medical conditions. In Tripoli, this particularly vulnerable group constitute
11% of the population surveyed
• The most common disability reported is physical and permanent disability (not due to
the conflict) and can be found in higher proportions in urban Tripoli (2.57%). Conflict
related disabilities are greater in rural Benghazi (2.2%) when compared to urban
Benghazi (0.6%) or urban Tripoli (1%)
Page 14
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
• Mental disabilities, visual, speech and hearing impairment are more frequent in urban
Tripoli when compared to Benghazi
• Displacement is generally triggered by the presence of armed groups and safety
concerns. Target locations are chosen because of the presence of household members
or relatives, and better access to basic services and facilities. Reasons for moving to
another area include better access to employment/income and the presence of tribal
members
• 43% of IDPs interviewed in Tripoli city are not registered
• 20% of IDPs households assessed in Benghazi city and rural have been requested to
move from their shelter in the last 30 days
• 44% of IDPs, 66% of returnees and 46% of host community households report feeling
either unsafe or very unsafe going to the market or shop to buy groceries
• In urban Benghazi and Tripoli, 12% and 10% of IDP households reported to have had
no income in the month prior to the assessment.
• The majority of households continue relying on Government employment and
allowances as their first and second income sources, followed by unstable employment
in the private sector and daily labour, particularly so for IDP households
• Due to a delay in payment of Government incomes, households have begun finding
other alternatives to overcome the shortage of funding, such as taking jobs like renting
their cars, renting small spaces such as garages or additional space in their houses
for IDPs to live in. These alternatives resulted in a temporary increase in their income
• 45% of income is spent on food needs, followed by expenditures on health and
housing. IDPs spend one-third of their income on rent
• With depleting economic resources, many IDP families are unable to pay their
rent when prioritising purchase of food, risking eviction from their current places of
residence
Page 15
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“70% of IDPs in Tripoli are in need (43% among them facing
acute needs). In Benghazi, findings show that 86% of
the IDPs are in need (nearly 50% facing acute needs) and
80% of the residents (15% in acute need) ”
Priority Interventions
Priorities for programming could include:
• Focus on supporting populations with
mental, physical and permanent disabilities
in Tripoli, and on physical disabilities caused
by conflict in Benghazi
FIGURES:
Figure 9: Humanitarian profile Benghazi area (KI interviews)
Number of people by affected groups in Benghazi area...
364,183
337,024
334,279
• Consider size of household in Benghazi
(above country level) in calculation of
assistance per family (hygiene kits, etc.)
• Provide medical assistance to chronically ill
patients as a top health priority
• Financial assistance to IDPs for paying rent
(keeping do-not-harm principles into careful
account) in order to prevent emergency
livelihood coping strategies
• Cash programming for IDPs and returnees,
but also vulnerable resident communities
Total Population in
Need
Number of affected people: The United
Nations and humanitarian partners estimated
in October 2015 that 3.08 million people,
almost half the population (6.3 million), have
been affected by the armed conflict in Libya
and an estimated 435,000 people have
been forcibly displaced from their homes
and another 1.75 million non-displaced
Libyans, most residing in urban centres, have
been affected by the crisis. There are an
estimated 150,000 vulnerable migrants and
approximately 100,000 vulnerable refugees
and asylum-seekers in Libya (HCT (2015a).
In February 2016, the second round of DTM
identified 322.000 displaced people in Libya
(DTM (2016/03)
The PAL estimates that 70% of IDPs in Tripoli
are in need (43% among them facing acute
needs). In Benghazi, findings show that 86% of
the IDPs are in need (nearly 50% facing acute
needs) and 80% of the residents (15% in acute
need).
10,550
# of population # who have
before the start fled the
of the conflict neighborhood
since the
conflict started
29,914
10,540
# of returnees
who came
back to the
neighborhood
12,080
# of displaced
persons who
arrived in the
neighborhood
# of residents
who are
not hosting
returnees or
displaced
persons
# of residents
population who
are hosting
returnees and
displaced
persons
Current total
pop
Figure 10: Humanitarian profile (IDPs only) Benghazi area (KI interviews)
87% of IDPs reported in Benghazi area are renting their house, hosted by
non-relatives or in public buildings...
13,940
10,921
4,063
3,456
606
In rented
house (selfpaid)
Hosted by
In public
non-relatives building
(schools,
mosques)
Hosted by
relatives
45
12
7
In rented
In abandoned In unfinished/ In nonhouse (paid resorts (non- abandoned formal
by others)
state paid)
building
settlements
Page 16
Humanitarian Profile in
Benghazi
The PAL collected estimates of affected population
in Benghazi only, using key informants at the
neighbourhood level. In the 16 visited neighbourhoods,
a total population of 364,183 people was reported by the
informants. Similarly, close to 33,000 IDPs were reported
by key informant in the visited neighbourhoods (16 out
of 23), 87% of them renting their house, hosted by nonrelatives or in public buildings. The last IDPs estimates
available (August 2015) mentioned around 47.000 IDPs
for the entire city. (3F and Benghazi Municipal Council
August 2015).
Socio-Demographic Context
Pre-Crisis
Population: Libya has a population of 6.259 million. In
the pre-conflict context, urban population in Libya was
last measured at 78.4% of all population according to the
World Bank (WB 2014) Although other figures suggested
a higher proportion of up to 80-85% of population
residing in urban areas (WHO 2010).
Population Profile: Persons between 0-14 years of age
account for 29.7% of the total population, 15-64 years for
65.9%, and persons 65 years and older represent 4.5%
of the total population. The female population is 49.6%
and male population is 50.4%. The population growth
rate is -0.1% (WB 2014).
Literacy level: Adult literacy rate for population 15+
years (%) is 90.3%. Youth literacy rate for population 1524 years is 99.9% (WB 2014).
HH Composition
The pre-crisis average number of households in Libya is
six members (WHO 2010). The PAL identified an average
number of people “living under the same roof” of nine
members in rural areas of Benghazi, where the largest
average HH sizes of resident families are reported, eight
in Benghazi urban areas and five in Tripoli urban areas.
The distribution of household members is generally the
same between resident and IDP households, with the
noticeable exception of Tripoli urban areas where IDPs
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
average household size is much larger than the typical
resident household size, as most of the displaced
households in Tripoli are coming from other locations
where household size is higher (only 11.5% of IDPs
households interviewed in Tripoli where originating from
the city).
The average age of the interviewed heads of
household is around 50 years, regardless the sex
or the displacement status of the household. 80%
of respondents reported being married, 12% being
widowed, and 7% being separated from their husband
or wife.
Page 17
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“14% of the assessed population reported
specific needs ”
Vulnerabilities and
Specific Needs
FIGURES:
Figure 11: Average household size by geographical areas and groups (HH interviews)
The average household size (number of people under a same roof) in urban
and rural Benghazi is higher when compared to pre-crisis levels...
14% of the population assessed reported
specific needs. IDPs families present higher
vulnerabilities with 15% of their members
facing specific needs compared to 12% for
residents. Vulnerabilities are higher in Tripoli,
due to the high number of people with chronic
diseases and critical medical conditions.
Gender-Related Vulnerability
Of the interviewed sample, 43% of household
members are female and 57% male. While
pre-crisis data indicates a normal distribution
for those ages group (52% male and 48%
female), the PAL findings from Benghazi area
report only 25% of females above 60 years
old and 17% of 0-4 years old for displaced
households and 19% and 11% respectively
for resident households. This could be due
to the fact that grandmothers take girls with
them and move to safer locations away from
the high intensity conflict areas. The number
of pregnant or lactating teenagers under 18
years old was greater in Tripoli urban (1.6%)
than in Benghazi urban (0.07%). No teenage
pregnancy incidence was reported in Benghazi
Rural. For pregnant women above 18 years
old, Tripoli had the higher percentage (1.85%)
when compared to Benghazi urban (0.56%)
and rural (0.43%).
Figure 12: Marital status by population group (HH interviews)
19% of households are headed by a single person...
Page 18
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“28 children were reported killed in the last 18 months
as a direct result of the conflict, mainly in rural
Benghazi. 16 of them were 12 to 17 years of age, and
12 were 11 years or younger ”
Age Related Vulnerability
(Children)
The group of under 18 years old constitutes
51% of the population assessed (only 41% in
Tripoli city compared to 55% in both Benghazi
rural and urban).
FIGURES:
Figure 13: Gender distribution per age interval and population groups (HH interviews)
Gender imbalance observed for females above 60 years and below 5 years of
age...
As expected, unaccompanied and separated
minors are found in higher proportion in urban
areas. The PAL reported 10 females and
one male unaccompanied and 25 females
and 32 males separated. The proportion of
unaccompanied minors is higher in Benghazi
urban (0.23%) when compared to Tripoli
Urban (0.15%). The proportion of separated
minors in comparison to the total population
assessed is three times higher in Tripoli urban
(1.5 %) compared to Benghazi urban and rural
(0.54%).
In total 61 children under 18 years old were
reported separated from their households
in the last 18 months, the majority from
households in Tripoli and Benghazi urban
areas, where IDP households are largely
concentrated. 28 children were reported killed
in the last 18 months as a direct result of the
conflict, mainly in rural Benghazi. 16 of them
were aged 12 to 17 years of age, and 12 were
11 years or younger.
49% of interviewed households reported
that the highest degree of education in their
family was a university degree. 28% reported
a high school level and 10% middle school.
Only 7% reported master studies. Elementary
school level was the highest degree for 5% of
households. Only 1% of households reported
no schooling at all. Education levels are similar
between geographical areas.
Figure 14: Highest education degree in interviewed families (HH interviews)
56% of interviewed households reported a university or a master degree as the
highest education degree...
Page 19
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“The main reason for not sending their children to
school is the safety of the learning environment (25%
describe it as 'unsafe' or 'very unsafe', particularly in
Benghazi) ”
An average of 62% of HHs reported that they
are able to send all their school-aged children
to school. The percentage is identical between
IDPs and residents and across geographical
areas. However, it is important to note that: a)
mainly areas with lower conflict levels were
visited under this assessment, b) often children
are enrolled in schools, but not all of them
regularly attend classes.
During the debriefing process, all enumerators
reported direct observations that a noticeable
number of children were not attending
school. The main reason for not sending their
children to school is the safety of the learning
environment (25% describe it as “unsafe” or
“very unsafe”, particularly in Benghazi).
Reasons for the lack of access to education
vary by population group, with host
communities much more likely to cite unsafe
access routes or the use of schools for
displaced households. A reported 70 schools
in Benghazi are currently being used as
temporary shelter for IDPs. In addition, loss
of legal documentation has been reported as
being a barrier to school enrolment. Pupils and
student may not be able to enrol in schools
or if they are, they may be on a “guest” status
only.
Globally and across all visited areas, the
biggest decrease in attendance when
comparing pre crisis level to current ones
are found in Benghazi city for both male
and female students. Attendance is slowly
increasing in Tripoli City, especially in primary
schools. IDP family’s attendance is generally
decreasing.
A 44% of key informants report that most
primary schools in their neighbourhoods of
Benghazi are closed (38% secondary schools)
including schools that are occupied by IDPs,
while in 44% of the visited neighbourhoods it
is reported that some or all primary schools
are open and functioning (50% of secondary
schools). No data was available from Tripoli.
FIGURES:
Figure 15: Ability to send school aged children to school (HH interviews)
62% of households declare being able to send their school aged children to
school...
Figure 16: Perception of safety of schools by head of families (HH interviews)
51% of schools are considered safe or very safe by head of families...
Page 20
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ The most common disability reported by head of
households is physical and permanent disability
(not due to the conflict) and can be found in higher
proportions in Tripoli city (2.57%) ”
FIGURES:
Figure 17: Children sent to school (2014-2016) (HH interviews)
Age Related Vulnerability (elderly)
Decrease in primary and secondary school registrations...
IDPs
Above 60 years old constitute 8.3% of the
population assessed, and nearly 10% in rural
area of Benghazi. PAL findings show that IDP
households have less elders than resident
households (8% vs 11.5% in Benghazi rural
for instance), with the notable exception of
Tripoli were elder proportions are similar for
both IDP and resident households. Nearly 7%
of all household members interviewed was
reported chronically ill or facing critical medical
conditions. In Tripoli, this proportion is nearly
11%.
The most common disability reported by head
of households is physical and permanent
disability (not due to the conflict) and can
be found in higher proportions in Tripoli city
(2.57%). Conflict related disabilities are greater
in rural Benghazi (2.2%) when compared to
urban Benghazi (0.6%) or urban Tripoli (1%).
Mental disabilities, visual, speech and hearing
impairment are also more frequent in Tripoli
city when compared to Benghazi.
Residents
Disability Related Vulnerability
Figure 18: Perception of safety of schools by head of families (HH interviews)
Only 25% of primary schools are open and functioning in the visited
areas of Benghazi...
Only 19% of secondary schools are open and functioning in the visited
areas of Benghazi...
Page 21
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“In rural Benghazi, 77% of IDPs reside in self paid
rented houses ”
Displacement Patterns
and Dynamics
Displaced Population in Libya
FIGURES:
Figure 19: % of the total population interviewed vulnerable due to disabilities (HH
interviews)
The number of conflict related disabilities is the highest in rural parts of
Benghazi...
In its second round in Feb 2016, the
Displacement Tracking Matrix by IOM
identified and located 322,000 displaced
individuals in Libya, covering 95 out of 104
geographical areas (9 areas were not covered,
including Benghazi area). 84% of IDPs were
reported hosted in private settings and 15%
(about 50,000 IDPs) live in collective settings.
A 95% of the identified IDPs had to cross into
other Baladiyahs to find refuge, while only
5% of the total identified IDPs were displaced
within their areas of origin.
150,362 returnees were also dentified, 95%
returning from other areas (IOM Jan and Feb
2016). Displacement patterns reveal both
cross-regional displacements (populations
fleeing from one side of the country to another)
as well as localized displacement, with
populations fleeing within their own provinces,
particularly in the northwest of Libya. (HCT
2015).
Displaced Population and Type of
Accommodation
Significant differences exist between assessed
areas for the type of settlement IDPs chose for
shelter:
• In rural Benghazi, 77% of IDPs reside
in self paid rented houses. 7% live in
unfinished/abandoned buildings and 6%
in public buildings. 3% only are hosted
by relatives. Some of the public buildings
are not equipped to host households and
lack minimal standards for basic services.
Similarly, unfinished/abandoned buildings
are often lacking basic safety and protection
measures, as well as basic services and
appliances (IOM 2016).
Figure 20: Type of settlement used by IDP families (HH interviews)
About half of all IDPs (48%) are residing in self-rented houses...
Page 22
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Non-formal settlements are usually the poorest of all
critical shelter forms; they are difficult to manage and
maintain, and poor in regards to basic standards ”
• In urban Benghazi, 50% of the IDP
population rent their houses, and 29% are
residing in public buildings. 7% are hosted
by relatives.
• In urban Tripoli, only 22% of all IDPs rent
their house. 29% are living in non-formal
settlements and 23% in abandoned resorts.
11% are residing in public buildings and
9% in unfinished/abandoned buildings.
Abandoned resorts, which once used to
be managed by foreign companies prior
to the 2014 escalations of violence, have
become the best equipped shelter types
across all IDP shelter types, however, tend
to be distant from population centres, market
places, and health facilities. Non-formal
settlements are usually the poorest of all
critical shelter forms; they are difficult to
manage and maintain, and poor in regards to
basic standards (IOM 2016).
Areas of origin: In January 2016, the IOM
Displacement Tracking Matrix identified the
majority of identified IDPs originating from
Benghazi, Tawergha, Derna, Sirte, Awbari
and Kikla, and are hosted mostly within the
Al Bayda, Tobruk , Ajdabiya, Abu Salim, Bani
Waled, Tocra, Zliten, Al Qubah, Sabha, Al
Ghurayfah, and Al Marj (IOM (2016).
IDPs in the areas assessed by the PAL came
in large proportion from Benghazi itself (61%),
Tawergha (11%), Tripoli (4%), Kakla (2.6%)
and Al Hesha (2.2%).
• In rural Benghazi, 95% of IDPs are
originating from Benghazi itself and 3.3%
from Al Bayda
• In urban Benghazi, 82% of IDPs are
coming from Benghazi itself, and 10% from
Tawergha
• In urban Tripoli, the situation is more diverse.
20% of IDPs are originating from Tawergha,
10% from Tripoli, 7.6% from Kakla, 6.5%
from Al Hesha and another 5% from
Benghazi
FIGURES:
Figure 21: Date of departure and arrival of IDPs households (HH interviews)
Unprecedented and continuous levels of displacement in 2015...
Page 23
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“96% of interviewed IDP households mentioned
'absence of conflict', 'safer environment' and "better
access to basic services" as the main preconditions for
taking the decision to return to their area of origin ”
Displacement dynamics: Armed fighting
escalated by mid May 2014 in Benghazi, then
in Tripoli by mid-June. During the summer of
2014, fighting in Tripoli and other areas of the
country characterized by the indiscriminate use
of heavy weaponry in densely populated areas
by all protagonists, led to the displacement of
hundreds of thousands of people within and
around the capital, as well as in Benghazi
(HCT 2015).
FIGURES:
Figure 22: Main reasons for displacement (HH interviews)
Presence of armed group and lack of safety account for more than 60% of
reasons for displacement...
Following conflict intensity, the highest peaks
of displacement occurred in both rural and
urban Benghazi in October 2014. Some IDPs
displaced in 2011 remained displaced over
time, specifically those coming from Tripoli.
Over the last 6 months, a regular influx of
displaced households is reported in Benghazi
city. The PAL findings match with the results
from the DTM Displacement Tracking Matrix
from January 2016 where 79% of the identified
IDPs are reported displaced in the past 18
months, the rest displaced for a longer time
(13% displaced during 2011, and 9 % between
2012 and mid-2014) (IOM 2016).
Presence of armed groups, lack of safety for
household members, destroyed houses and
poor access to basic services and facilities
were mentioned by 83% of all interviewed IDP
households as the main reasons for leaving
their area of origin. A 9% mentioned direct
threats or violence against their household,
and 4% the presence of mines or explosives
as a reason for displacement.
66% of interviewed IDP respondents
mentioned “seeking a safer environment”,
“support by household or friends” and
“better access to basic services” as the main
reason to choose their current location. A
9% mentioned the “presence of same tribe
members” as a main reason, 5% reported
“better access to employment or income” and
4% “better access to food”. 4% report having
chosen the location to be better prepared for
further relocation.
Figure 23: Main reasons for displacement to the current location (HH interviews)
Safety, presence of relatives and better access to basic services and facilities are
main reasons for IDPs to choose their current location...
Page 24
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“66% of IDPs mentioned "seeking a safer environment",
"support by household or friends" and "better access
to basic services" as the main reason to choose their
current location ”
Access to rights: Registration mechanisms
are functioning in both urban and rural parts
of Benghazi, but to a lesser extent in urban
Tripoli. Of the interviewed IDP households,
21% reported that they are not registered, the
majority of them in urban Tripoli (only 55% of
interviewed IDP are registered). In rural and
urban Benghazi, more than 90% of interviewed
IDPs reported that they are registered.
Return dynamics: 96% of interviewed IDP
households mentioned “absence of conflict”,
“safer environment” and “better access to
basic services” as the main preconditions
for taking the decision to return to their area
of origin. This corresponds with the result
of the DTM, reporting that most IDPs are
not able to return to their former areas of
residence for reasons related to their safety
and security, access and condition of their
houses and assets (destroyed, damaged, or
squatted by others), access to and sufficiency
of basic services in locations of origin, and the
acceptance of the community (IOM 2016).
88% of interviewed IDP households reported
their intention to remain in their current location
in the coming months. A 3% reported that they
will return to their area of origin, 3% stated
their intention to move to a third country, and
2% their intention to move to another location
inside Libya. Only 1% of IDPs in Benghazi
reported that they will return to their area of
origin in the coming months, compared against
8% of IDPs in urban Tripoli. In urban Benghazi
4% of IDPs declared their intention to move to
Europe or a third country.
FIGURES:
Figure 24: Registration status of IDP families (HH interviews)
Nearly 80% of displaced households are registered locally...
Figure 25: Main preconditions for returning to area of origin (HH interviews)
Main preconditions for a possible return of IDPs to their areas of origin: safety
and absence of conflict...
Page 25
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ For 58% of IDPs, the community is "supportive and
will continue to support as long as necessary". Some
18% of IDPs mentioned that their host communities
“will continue to support but only for a limited time ”
Interactions between IDPs and
Host Communities
For 58% of the IDP households, the
community is reportedly “supportive and will
continue to support as long as necessary”.
Some 18% of IDPs mentioned that their host
communities “will continue to support but
only for a limited time”. Lack of support was
mentioned by 15% of IDP respondents and
existence of tensions by 8% of IDPs. Tensions
are especially reported in Tripoli City (14%)
and Benghazi rural (7%). Lack of support from
the community was reported by 22% of IDPs in
Benghazi City compared to 13% in Benghazi
rural or 11% in Tripoli City.
In rural and urban Benghazi, 21% and 22%
respectively of IDPs households have been
requested to move shelter in the last 30 days.
In comparison, only 6% of IDPs in Tripoli City
have been requested to move.
Livelihoods and Food
Security
Food Security
According to secondary data, 1.28 million
people are currently estimated to be food
insecure, including 175,000 IDPs. Libya relies
on imports for more than 90% of its food and
the complex conflict in the country is affecting
the food supply chain severely. Attacks on
the commercial port in Benghazi are reported
to have disrupted critical food import routes.
There has been a substantial decline in food
imports as foreign shippers fear making
deliveries (Reuters 31/07/2015). The HoR has
reported that it has started tapping into the
country’s strategic wheat reserves to ensure
bread supplies. Basic food items in Benghazi
are only available in areas controlled by the
LNA (ACAPS 2016).
FIGURES:
Figure 26: 88% of IDPs declared they will stay in their current location (HH Interviews)
Main preconditions for a possible return of IDPs to their areas of origin: safety
and absence of conflict...
Figure 27: Relationships with hosting communities (HH interviews)
8% of IDPs report tensions and non-supportive host communities...
Page 26
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Unstable employment and daily labour are replacing
income from the private sector, and particularly so for
IDP households ”
Traditionally, Libyans received government
food subsidies which reduced the cost of key
commodities by some 50%. In November
2015, however, to relieve public finance
affected by dwindling oil revenue, the General
National Congress (GNC), which has control
over fund transfers for salaries or subsidies,
announced it was abolishing food subsidies,
replacing them with a monthly cash payment of
USD 39 to all Libyan citizens that is still to be
implemented (WFP 2015).
Food shortages are most prevalent in the
south (Sabha) and the east (Benghazi, Derna)
due to supply disruptions. Basic food items
including wheat, bread, flour, pasta, oil, milk
and fortified blended foods for children are in
short supply (IRIN 02/12/2015) while in Tripoli
supplies were reported to be depleting (HCT
2015).
Access to food and markets: The
subsequent disruption of food supplies has
led to significant inflation on food prices, with
reports that the prices of flour, rice and sugar
have more than tripled in Derna, Tripoli and
Saba since the upsurge of fighting erupted in
May 2014 (HCT 2015). The primary barrier to
food access in conflict-affected communities
across Libya was found to be a lack of
financial resources. In particular, the south
region has witnessed severe cash shortages
and disruption of the banking system. The
deteriorating security also put constraints
to market access, with 44% of IDPs, 66%
of returnees and 46% of host community
households reporting feeling either unsafe or
very unsafe going to the market or shop to buy
groceries (MSNA 2015).
FIGURES:
Figure 28: Request to move from current shelter in the last 30 days (HH interviews)
15% of IDPs Households have been requested to move from their shelter in the
last 30 days...
Figure 29: Estimation of current household income (LYD) per month today (HH interviews)
IDP households report lower levels of income than resident communities...
Page 27
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ IDP households report that they are spending one third
of their income on rent ”
“ In Tripoli, enumerators reported specific fears among
IDPs of being expelled from their spontaneous shelters
by powerful groups “
Access to cash: Under the MSNA, 78% of key
informants reported limited or no cash available in their
community. Half of key informants reported that banking
services did not work regularly in the last 3 months. In
the south the situation is more prevalent, with 85% of
key informants reporting no functional banking services
in the last three months (MSNA 2015). Access to cash
is a major challenge with banking services not fully
functional and salary and/or pension payments delayed.
Food assistance is being provided by host communities
and households/relatives for IDPs; however, refugees,
asylum-seekers and migrants do not benefit from such
assistance (MSNA 2015).
earning up to 500 Libyan Dinars has remained stable at
about 25% across all assessed areas (slightly higher in
Tripoli), the percentage of those earning 1000-1500 LYD
has increased currently across all areas.
Income
Under the PAL, the interviewed households were
asked to rank their top three income sources before
the conflict and currently. Prior to 2011, a large share
of the population in Libya was employed in the public
sector. This is also confirmed by the findings of the
assessment. The top three income sources before the
conflict were reported to be Government employment,
followed by allowances (including social welfare and
social security) and employment in the private sector.
Currently, the majority of the assessed households
reported to still rely on Government employment and
allowances as their first and second income sources,
but unstable employment and daily labour are replacing
income from the private sector, and particularly so for
IDP households.
In previous assessments, two thirds of IDPs, host
communities and returnee households were found
to rely on government salaries or pensions as their
main source of income. 79% households cited salaries
were not paid or were delayed. For these households,
government salaries or pension contribute to more than
80% of the total income. In contrast, households citing
casual labour as their main source of income reported
that this only contributed to 44% of the average total
income, indicating that these households have a more
diversified income portfolio. (MSNA 2015) In addition,
the inflation rate in Libya was recorded at 11.4% in
September of 2015. Inflation Rate in Libya averaged 5%
from 2004 until 2015, reaching an all-time high of 29.6%
in September of 2011.
Reported incomes in Libya show slightly inconsistent
patterns when it comes to middle-class earners currently
and before crisis. While the percentage of people
While some increase (4%) is also reported in IDP
households, the increase is highest reported for resident
communities of the assessed areas (doubled from 17%
to 34%). Due to a delay in payment of Government
salaries, households have begun taking jobs like renting
their cars, renting small spaces such as garages or
additional space in their houses for IDPs to live in,
as sources of additional income that can explain the
increase in income among residents.
Percentage of households with working children:
Generally, children were not reported to contribute to
the family income, as reported by 93% of the assessed
households. 5% reported that there are no children
in the households and 2% reported that children
do engage in income generating activities for the
households. There was no difference recorded between
IDP and Resident households.
Expenditures
Food is the main expenditure for HHs across all
assessed areas. 45% of the HHs income is spent on
food needs, followed by expenditures on health and
housing. In Tripoli 54% of the HH’s income is spent
on food. However, IDP households report that they
are spending one third of their income on rent. With
depleting economic resources, many IDP families are
unable to pay rent when prioritising purchase of food,
risking eviction from their current places of residence.
This was confirmed by enumerators during the
debriefing process under the PAL. In Tripoli,
enumerators reported specific fears among IDPs of
being expelled from their spontaneous shelters by
powerful groups. In rural Benghazi, the main fear
observed among IDPs is related to the lack of financial
capacity of IDPs living in rented accommodation and the
fear of being forced to look for any alternatives soon if
they cannot afford the high rents anymore. In addition,
there is a major concern for IDPs residing in schools to
be forced to stay for longer time in the bad conditions of
schools. Enumerators also observed concerns among
host communities, which is the lack of schools because
many are hosting IDPs.
Page 28
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ IDPs in Tripoli report that their savings would
only last for 14 more days to sustain their
needs ”
Taking the above into consideration,
households were asked to estimate how
many days they can sustain expenditures with
current savings without external assistance.
In Tripoli, where expenditure on food and the
proportion of population living with a monthly
income of under 500 LYD are highest, IDP
households report that their savings would
only last in Tripoli for 14 more days to sustain
their needs. Both resident and IDP households
report that their savings would last for the
shortest time in urban Benghazi and longest in
rural Benghazi. In urban Benghazi and Tripoli,
12% and 10% of IDP households reported to
have had no income in the month prior to the
assessment.
FIGURES:
Figure 30: Households three main expenditures over the past 30 days, as a % of total
expenditures (HH interviews)
Food is the main expenditure for HHs across all assessed areas. IDPs spend onethird of their income on rent…
Livelihood Coping Strategies
According to household respondents under
the PAL, only 1% of all HHs reported to be
currently using emergency coping strategies.
Those include taking high risk jobs as well as
sending children and other family members
to beg. However, both resident and IDP
households report to apply crisis strategies
such as selling productive assets or spending
less money on other needs several times in
the course of one month. For IDP households,
such expenses include particularly spending
less money on health and education needs.
Given the high usage of crisis livelihood coping
strategies, coupled with the high reliance
on savings and the very short period of time
HHs report to be able to cope and sustain
expenditures without external assistance, it
is likely that particularly IDP households will
further resort to using emergency livelihood
coping strategies in the upcoming months.
Figure 31: Households usage of livelihood coping strategies the past 30 days, as a % of
total times of strategies used (HH interviews)
IDPs adopt more crisis and emergency coping strategies than residents…
Page 29
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
D. Protection Needs and Access to Services
Key Findings
• IDP households are the population group most at risk of protection issues, followed by
refugees and migrants, and residents hosting IDPs
• Most vulnerable IDPs are those residing in rented houses (subject to eviction if they fail
to pay rent), followed by IDPs in public buildings
• Absence of justice or the breakdown of law and order, including indiscriminate attacks
on civilians, housing, land or property related issues (especially for IDPs), and the
lack or loss of personal documents are the three most commonly observed protection
concerns
• About one quarter of all households feel not protected enough or completely unprotected
against violence, especially IDPs. Female respondents feel less protected than male
respondents, and respondents in Tripoli feel generally better protected than populations
in Benghazi
• The majority of household respondents report symptoms of psychological distress as a
consequence of experienced protection concerns, including children
• ERW contamination in Libya remains extensive, but as yet unquantified, in all conflictaffected areas. Between 23 and 25 February UNSMIL has received information from
Benghazi Medical Centre (BMC) that three persons were killed and five others were
injured among the returnees as the result of mine explosions in Al-Leithi neighbourhood.
Downtown and Sabri areas in Benghazi are reported as heavily contaminated.
• Tensions between population groups are observed in Benghazi (no data for Tripoli),
especially in rural areas. The main reasons are overcrowding of residential areas and
competition for limited resources
• Tensions between population groups are observed in Benghazi (no data for Tripoli),
especially in rural areas. The main reasons are overcrowding of residential areas and
competition for limited resources
• The majority of households, and especially IDPs, are poorly informed about available
assistance and support in their communities, and in particular how to access healthcare
• Mental disabilities, visual, speech and hearing impairment are more frequent in urban
Tripoli when compared to Benghazi
Page 30
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ The population group considered most at risk of
protection issues are IDP families, followed by
refugees and migrants from outside Libya, and
residents hosting IDPs ”
Recommendations
• Provision of financial assistance for most
vulnerable IDPs (to pay rent)
• Basic health support, especially for IDPs and
in rural areas
• Conduct WRW clearance activities and
integrated risk awareness training to reduce
the likelihood of injury or death by ERW in
contaminated areas of Benghazi. Remove
booby traps before dealing with mines or
Unexploded Ordnance (UXO)
• Improve access to protection services,
formal and informal protection mechanisms,
community based support
• Increase knowledge of protection principles
among social workers, parents, teachers,
community and religious leaders, as well as
doctors and nurses
• Outreach is required to ensure mobilization
in the community is undertaken to ensure
an effective response to GBV victims, which
continues to be under-reported
• Reinforce the accountability of duty bearers,
capacity building and awareness-raising
activities
• Expand psychosocial support services for
children and adolescents in schools through
inclusive child friendly spaces and training of
specialized social workers
• Support existing programmes by government
and civil society in providing training of
doctors and social workers to work with
children and their parents
FIGURES:
Figure 32: Population groups considered most at risk of safety and dignity concerns
(Benghazi only, key informant interviews)
In Benghazi, IDPs are considered the population group most at risk of
protection concerns...
Page 31
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ The absence of justice or the breakdown of law
and order is the ultimate problem, including
indiscriminate attacks on civilians ”
Main Protection Issues
Most affected groups
The population group considered most at risk
of protection issues are IDP families, followed
by refugees and migrants from outside
Libya, and residents hosting IDPs. Among
the displaced populations, key informants in
Benghazi (no data for Tripoli) report that the
most affected population groups are IDPs
in rented houses, followed by IDPs in public
buildings, and those hosted by relatives.
Among these most affected population groups,
the main age group at risk of protection
concerns are older persons (60+ years old)
followed by children under 5 years of age, and
women (in general). When asked specifically
which group of people are most at risk in terms
of safety, key informants report that especially
female heads of household are at risk,
followed by persons with disabilities (3.4% of
the total population assessed under the PAL),
and chronically ill persons (7%).
FIGURES:
Figure 33: Main types of violence or safety problems over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
The breakdown of law enforcement and administration of justice system is a
major protection concern...
Main protection needs
Household respondents were more open to
talk about their protection concerns and needs,
when compared to key informants. When
asked about what type of violence of safety
problems have been of most concern over the
past 30 days, interviewed households consider
the “absence of justice or the breakdown
of law and order” as the ultimate problem,
including indiscriminate attacks on civilians,
followed by “housing, land or property related
issues” (especially for IDPs), and the “lack or
loss of personal documents”.
Please note: Most key informants under this assessment
commonly refused to answer questions around specific
protection concerns in their communities. This could indicate
that issues such as kidnappings, physical abuse, restricted
population movement, or SGBV are occurring, but talking about
them openly is considered too sensitive (see also Section formal
and informal protection mechanisms, ‘Service providers suffering
pressures, type and impact’). This applies specifically to the
situation in Tripoli, where enumerators under this assessment
were generally unable to conduct any key informant interviews.
Page 32
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Between 23 and 25 February UNSMIL has received
information from Benghazi Medical Center that three
persons were killed and five others were injured among
the returnees as the result of mine explosions in Al- Leithi
neighbourhood ”
Absence of justice and indiscriminate attacks:
Courts have not been functioning in Benghazi since
2014 (no secondary data available for Tripoli).
Judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement officials
have continued to face violent attacks and threats.
The judiciary has also been affected by the political
polarization and struggle for control of government
institutions. Victims have little avenue to seek protection
and remedy amidst total impunity. According to UNSMIL,
none of the 2014-2015 conflict-related detainees in the
west have appeared in front of prosecutions or courts
(OHCHR 11/2015).
Indiscriminate attacks and targeting of civilian residential
areas are another key protection concern of the
interviewed households under this assessment. In
January 2016, two displaced camps were struck by four
rockets in Benghazi, with no military or militia presence
in either camp (HRW 2016). Across Libya, warring
factions showed little regard for avoiding or minimizing
loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to
civilian objects. Imprecise weaponry is used in denselypopulated residential areas in what often amounted
to indiscriminate attacks. UNSMIL has also received
reports that airstrikes by Operation Dignity, Libya Dawn
and in one instance the Egyptian air force led to civilian
casualties and/or damage to civilian infrastructure
(OHCHR 2015).
Housing, land or property related issues: IDPs are
generally forced to use their own resources to pay rent or
contribute to household costs. 48% of IDPs interviewed
during the PAL are renting their own house, especially
in Benghazi rural (77%) and city (50%). In the context
of reduced access to economic opportunities, a large
proportion of IDPs and affected host communities are
struggling to cover housing costs that would enable them
to live in safety and with dignity, with Benghazi particularly
acutely affected. The heavy financial burden of rental
costs puts IDPs at a higher risk of impoverishment and
eviction, given their restricted access to livelihoods
(MSNA 02/2016). As Identified in the previous section of
this report, 21% of IDPs in both Benghazi urban and rural
have been requested to move in the past 30 days (6% in
Tripoli). Secondly, former IDPs returning to their habitual
place of residence often lack access to mechanisms for
property restitution, reconstruction of their homes, or
compensation (MSNA 02/2016).
Lack of documentation: Loss or theft of identity
documents - a prerequisite for receiving government
pensions or salaries - leaves many households
unable to access these sources of income, becoming
more vulnerable. According to MSNA, 28% of IDP
households lost legal documentation. A 61% of families
are facing difficulties registering newborn children.
Over 90% of IDPs face this difficulty, which creates a
risk of statelessness in the absence of documentary
evidence of birth, identity and parentage. Loss of legal
documentation has also been reported as being a
barrier to school enrolment. Pupils and student are not
able to enrol in schools or if they are, they are on a
“guest” status only (MSNA, 07/2015).
Presence of ERW and SALW: ERW contamination
in Libya remains extensive, but as yet unquantified,
in all conflict-affected areas. Between 23 and 25
February UNSMIL has received information from
Benghazi Medical Center (BMC) that three persons
were killed and five others were injured among the
returnees as the result of mine explosions in AlLeithi neighbourhood. Up to 300 ERW incidents were
reported in Benghazi over a three-month period in
2015. The risk of injury or death from ERW or from
unattended small arm and light weapons (SALW) is
high, particularly among children and IDPs returning to
their homes.
Libyan Mine Action Centre (LibMAC) does not currently
have the capacity to implement a countrywide survey
and clearance activities (HRP 2015). 57% of MSNA
surveyed key informants reported the presence of
landmines and unexploded ordnance (UXOs) in
their communities, with a higher percentage (79%)
in the East and South (66%), relative to 12% in the
west (MSNA, 07/2015). An assessment of Free Field
Foundation in September 2015 in Benghazi reported
that contaminated areas in the city are located
where heavy fighting took place or continues and
mentioned high levels of destruction to infrastructures,
buildings and local communities. This includes the
neighbourhoods of Al-Leithi, Benghazi Downtown,
Sabri, Boatni, Hawari, Qguarsha, GarYounes, Qnfodh
and Bofajrh. Downtown and Sabri are considered the
worst affected areas because of the heavy clashes and
fierce fighting. The areas are reported to be booby traps
with mines in large quantities, in addition to the evident
wide destruction of buildings by ERW (3F, 09/2015).
Page 33
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Enumerators frequently observed boys between 15 and
17 years of age recruited by armed groups in Benghazi.
No child recruitment was observed in Tripoli ”
“ Children in Tripoli were observed to engage in hazardous
labour, including working in industrial facilities,
working in isolated remote markets and working on
construction sites under poor safety conditions ”
Child recruitment: During the debriefing process under
PAL, enumerators reported having frequently observed
boys between 15 and 17 years of age recruited by
armed groups in Benghazi. No child recruitment was
observed by enumerators in Tripoli. This confirms
findings under the MSNA in July 2015 that highlighted
a high incidence of child recruitment (the issue was
excluded in the revised MSNA in 2016 as too sensitive).
Half of key informants reported that they are aware of
cases of children and adolescents in their community
being recruited to join armed groups. Secondary data
suggest that key informants may have underreported
such issues in the East and West. Save the Children
it its June 2015 SCELTA report notes that Child
recruitment is a common occurrence across the country.
Males from 15 years of age onwards regularly join local
armed groups. Children at the age of 14 are imprisoned
alongside adults in GNC-controlled detention facilities
(HRW 03/12/2015). According to Save the Children,
male youths between 16-17 years of age are attracted
to join the militias by the offer of money and because
they have nothing else to do having dropped out of
secondary school (SC 2015).
Libyan community groups are subject to discrimination:
According to Save the Children, displaced children, in
particular from Tawerga (considered to be “pro-regime”)
fear they will be attacked by other children if they return
to school. As a result, parents often decide to keep their
children in the camps to study there (SCI 2015).
Discrimination against migrants and minorities:
Libya is not a signatory country 1951 Refugee
Convention; hence the country does not recognize
asylum-seekers or refugees. There are an estimated
250,000 vulnerable refugees, asylum-seekers and
migrants in Libya, mostly undocumented and who have
limited or no legal rights. They are frequently denied
access to basic services, including healthcare, education
and legal support as a result of their status. 44% of
refugees and 33% migrants surveyed in MSNA have
limited or no access to health facilities. It is generally
found migrants and refugees/asylum-seekers to have
less access to protection and basic services than IDPs,
returnees or the host community. Lacking access to a
government salary or pension—the most commonly
cited income source for IDPs—many refugees and
migrants lacked access to a stable source of income
(HCT 2015). Furthermore, refugees, asylum-seekers
and migrants often lack a social network to rely upon for
additional support and are less able to seek assistance
from local communities. As a result, they are among
the most vulnerable of the affected population and
often find themselves subject to abuse and exploitation
from criminal smuggling networks (MSNA 2015). Also
Child labour: Interestingly, while the vast majority
of household respondents under this assessment
report that children are not contributing to their family
income, they identify child labour as a key protection
concern. According to Save the Children, civil society
organisations in Tripoli often report the presence of
IDP children in the streets selling tissues and begging
for money (SCI 2015). This was confirmed under the
PAL for Tripoli, where enumerators reported during the
debriefing process that they have frequently observed
the presence of begging children in all visited areas
of Tripoli. This was not observed in rural or urban
Benghazi.
Family separation and unaccompanied minors:
With the migrant and refugee crisis in Libya, especially
migrant children are at an increased risk of being
separated from their families while making the journey
through Libya and across the Mediterranean Sea to
reach Europe. Unaccompanied children and childheaded households have been reported in displaced
and conflict-affected communities (MSNA 2015).
According to Save the Children, unaccompanied minors
are a key vulnerable group in Libya (SCI 2015). The
PAL identified a higher proportion of unaccompanied
minors in Benghazi urban (0.23% of the total population
assessed) when compared to Tripoli Urban (0.15%).
The proportion of separated minors is three times more
important in Tripoli urban (1.5 %) compared to Benghazi
urban and rural (0.54%).
According to PAL enumerators in Tripoli, children were
observed to engage in hazardous labour, including
working in industrial facilities that require large physical
capacity, working in isolated remote markets where
children can be subjected to abuse easily and working in
construction sites under poor safety conditions. In none
of the visited parts of urban and rural Benghazi such
issues were reported, although armed children were
reported.
Page 34
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ About 26% of households feel 'not protected enough'
or 'completely unprotected' against violence or safety
problems in their neighbourhood or village ”
Sexual and Gender-based Violence: According to
Save the Children, SGBV is a substantial problem in
Libya, both in the Libyan community as well as in the
mixed migration population (SCI 2015). There is limited
documented evidence on domestic violence, rape and
other forms of gender-based violence inside and outside
the home. SGBV is considered private matters that
carry a great deal of shame and are rarely discussed
publicly. Staff of civil society organisations are generally
untrained to address these concerns (SCI 2015). There
is a lack of response services available to survivors
of SGBV. The capacity to detect, treat and provide
counselling to GBV survivors is absent or weak and has
historically been limited to civil society organizations in
eastern Libya. Survivors often fear disclosing exposure
to GBV to healthcare professionals (HCT 2015).
Under the 2015 MSNA, over 45% of key informants
reported that women in their community had
experienced violence. Key informants reported that
women experiencing violence most commonly seek
assistance from tribes and local elites (76%), religious
leaders (38%) and community leaders (32%), yet only
11% indicated that women receive assistance from
hospital and health centres. International NGOs or
UN agencies were reported as sources of assistance
in such cases by 16% and 7% of key informants,
respectively (MSNA 2015). SGBV is considered private
matters that carry a great deal of shame and is generally
under-reported. A victim of rape risks being prosecuted
herself for extramarital relations if she presses charges
and may instead have to marry the perpetrator (SCI
2015).
Early marriage: No secondary data on child marriage
is available from before the crisis. Lack of security,
displacement and deterioration of schools may
encourage parents to arrange for their daughters to
be married at a young age (HCT 2015). A 13% of key
informants in MSNA report marriage of children or
adolescents under 18 years of age taking place in their
communities (MSNA 2015).
Human trafficking and migrant smuggling: As one of the
main channels of flows from and across North Africa,
with the complication of internal conflicts, Libya offers a
ground for proliferation of criminal organizations, which
are widely involved with managing illegal migration,
smuggling migrants and human trafficking (PONTES
2015). UNSMIL has documented severe abuses by
smugglers and traffickers thriving in the context of
lawlessness (OHCHR 2015). A total of 300,000 people
have tried to cross Mediterranean in 2015, 2,373 were
believed to have died in the attempt, relative to a total
of 3,279 that lost their lives in 2014. Armed smugglers
have forced migrants and asylum-seekers to board
overcrowded boats and travel below deck in overheated
engine rooms without water or ventilation (OHCHR
2015). Migrants pay thousands of dollars to smugglers
to facilitate a perilous voyage across the Mediterranean
Sea, risking their lives in ever increasing numbers (HCT
2015).
Level of Protection
About 26% of household respondents feel “not protected
enough” or “completely unprotected” against violence or
safety problems in their neighbourhood or village, while
43% report that they feel “protected” or “well protected”.
IDPs generally feel less protected than resident
communities: Over 32% of IDPs feel “not protected” or
“completely unprotected”, while this is only the case for
16% of resident community members. Respondents in
Tripoli feel generally better protected when compared to
populations in Benghazi.
Page 35
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ 94% of displaced households report children with signs
of psychological distress over the past 30 days in rural
areas of Benghazi (82% in urban areas) ”
Impact
The majority of household respondents report
symptoms of psychological distress, including
lack of sleep, stress, sadness, anxiety, and
loss of motivation as a direct consequence
of the experienced protection concerns. This
affects IDPs more than resident communities,
especially in rural areas. In Benghazi, 95% of
IDP HHs in rural parts (87% in visited urban
areas) report adult members with symptoms
of psychological distress over the past 30
days. The number of household respondents
reporting this problem is significantly lower
in Tripoli (33% IDPs and 14% resident
communities), when compared to Benghazi
(91% IDPs and 84% residents).
The psychological distress of children is
similar to those of adult family members.
94% of displaced households report children
with signs of psychological distress over the
past 30 days in rural areas of Benghazi (82%
in urban areas). Again, this percentage is
reported lower in the urban areas of Tripoli
covered under this assessment. Possible
explanations of this phenomenon include
that respondents in Tripoli generally seemed
less open in answering questions during this
assessment, and that the level of protection
concerns in urban Tripoli is lower, when
compared to the situation in Benghazi.
FIGURES:
Figure 34: Perceived level of protecting against any form of violence or safety
problems over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Female respondents feel less protected than males, especially among IDPs...
Figure 35: Number of family members with signs or symptoms of psychological
distress over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
The majority of household respondents report symptoms of psychological
distress...
Page 36
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Key informants in Benghazi reported tensions between
different population groups, especially in rural areas,
where competition over limited resources is observed ”
Tensions Between Population
Groups
MSNA in 2015 revealed that among all affected
population, refugees and migrants reported
a higher percentage of perceived tensions
with hosting communities. The reported
status of relationship with hosting community
is generally more negative for migrants and
refugees than IDPs. Discrimination and
intimidation against IDP pupils and students
has been reported in locations where tensions
exist between the host community and the
displaced.
Under this assessment, key informants in
Benghazi reported tensions between different
population groups in Benghazi, especially
in rural areas, where more competition over
limited resources is observed and the resident
households are on average the largest, with
up to 10 persons living under one roof. In
50% of the 16 visited neighbourhoods, some
tensions between resident communities are
reported. Tensions between IDPs and resident
communities are “sometimes” observed in 36%
of the visited neighbourhoods of Benghazi,
especially in rural parts (60%), and less often
in urban areas (22%). More tensions between
IDP populations were observed “sometimes” in
40% of the urban parts, and “often” in 11% of
rural parts of Benghazi.
The main reasons for tensions between
communities are overcrowding of residential
areas, competition for limited resources,
especially bread and wheat flower, and
restrictions to access to cash. When asked
how often community tensions are observed,
key informants report that tensions are
reported “less than once every two weeks” in
three-thirds of the visited areas.
During the debriefing process under the
PAL, enumerators in Tripoli reported their
observations of tensions between host
communities and IDPs residing in camps and
spontaneous shelter, who reported frequent
harassments by powerful groups.
FIGURES:
Figure 36: Frequency and type of tensions observed in their neighbourhood/village in
the last 30 days (Benghazi only, key informants)
Competition over access to limited resources is a cause of tensions between
population groups...
Page 37
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Tensions result from children's lack of access to schools
that are occupied by IDPs, the lack of available shelter,
and complaints by host communities that IDPs are
responsible for the increase of prices of food in the
markets ”
In rural and urban Benghazi, tensions directly
observed by enumerators were mostly related
to the fact that children cannot visit schools
that are occupied by IDPs, the lack of available
shelter, and occasional complaints by host
communities that IDPs are responsible for the
increase of prices of food in the markets.
FIGURES:
Figure 37: Frequency and type of tensions observed in their neighbourhood/village in
the last 30 days (Benghazi only, key informants)
Tensions between men and women are more frequently observed, especially in
rural areas...
Tensions between men and women are more
frequently observed in rural areas (KIs in 20%
of visited areas report tensions “sometimes”)
when compared to urban areas (11%). Other
reasons for community tensions include the
deviation of resources, discrimination in the
distribution of resources and hatred discourse
on specific groups.
Access to Information
The interviewed household generally feel
“poorly informed” or “not informed at all” about
available assistance and support in their
communities. This is particularly the case for
IDPs, in both Benghazi and Tripoli. Especially
female respondents (64%) report being less
informed about access to assistance and
support, when compared to male respondents
(55%).
Figure 38: Level of information about available assistance and support in the
community (HH interviews)
Household generally feel “poorly informed” or “not informed at all” about
available assistance and support...
Page 38
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Resident community members use internet more often
as source of information, when compared to IDPs, and
women more often than men ”
Preferred and Trusted Channel of
Communication
Preferred and most trusted sources of
information (in priority order) are talking to
other people directly of via mobile phone/
SMS, their religious leaders, or television.
The least preferred sources of information are
newspapers, signboards, or road broadcasts.
Resident community members use the internet
more often as source of information, when
compared to IDPs, and women more often
than men.
Type of Information Desired
The main issue interviewed households lack
information about is how to access healthcare,
for both IDP and resident communities, and
where to seek help after being exposed to
violence. The main lack of information reported
by both male and female IDP respondents is
the situation at their place of origin.
FIGURES:
Figure 39: Top three issues HH respondents lack information about (HH interviews)
Most households lack information on how to access health care...
Page 39
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
E. Formal and Informal Protection Mechanisms
Key Findings
• Access to sustained formal protection services continues to be a major challenge for
the population in need due to ongoing conflicts and restricted movement
• As a consequence, people generally turn towards family members and friends when
they do not feel safe and seek support
• In rural areas as well as in areas that are exposed to conflict the main protection
mechanism are tribes and local elites, in urban areas the court and justice system
• Available protection mechanisms are less accessible in areas of Benghazi that witness
sporadic fighting (no data for Tripoli)
• None of the schools in Benghazi that are functional have child protection mechanisms
in place, and teachers commonly lack the specialization to address protection concerns
• Seeking protection assistance from UN agencies and INGOs is not an option for the
majority of household respondents, because they are either not present, or populations
are unaware about available services
• IDPs are more inclined to request protection support (taking their higher level of needs
into account) when compared to resident communities, and especially in rural areas
• One of the main reasons why people with protection concerns do not turn towards
service providers is that available protection mechanisms are considered largely
inappropriate
• The breakdown of law and order in Libya is severely impacting the work of civil society
organizations. Those reporting on human rights violations are at risk
Page 40
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ In 50% of the visited neighbourhoods of Benghazi key
informants report the ability of SGBV victims to access
judicial recourse as 'rarely and very difficult' or 'most of
the time difficult ”
Recommendations
• Mapping of available protection services, incl.
civil society organisations, establishing referral
mechanisms
• Capacity building of protection service providers,
including training of volunteers
• Specifically, training on needs assessments and
targeting most vulnerable groups
• Provision of child protection services at schools
• Provide specific (and discreet) support to agencies
working on SGBV
• Prioritize IDPs, especially women and children in rural
areas (Benghazi)
• Advocate for the protection of service providers,
especially civil society representatives
Protection Mechanisms
With the complication of a crippled justice system
and little law enforcement, national protection-related
services providers remain hospitals and other health
care services. Yet very few health facilities reported
cases of protection issues and some health facilities
did not offer services for survivors of sexual violence,
or psychosocial support (IMC 2015). The access to
sustained formal protection services continues to be
a major challenge for the population in need due to
ongoing conflicts and restricted movement. In MSNA,
health services were the only type of protection-related
service that all population groups reported it was easy
to access. Over 60% of IDP households reported
difficulties accessing psychosocial support, police, safe
shelters, community centres, and women/child-friendly
spaces (MSNA 2015).
However, with the withdrawing of most NGOs from
Libya, local capacity to respond is limited. UNHCR,
leading the protection sector, has documented physical
and verbal assaults, arbitrary detention, closure of civil
society offices and death threats facing human rights
defenders in Libya. But there is limited documented
evidence on domestic violence, rape and other forms
of gender-based violence inside and outside the home.
SGBV is considered private matters that carry a great
deal of shame and under-reported (SCI 2015).
Key informants (only Benghazi) under this assessment
report different available protection mechanisms
responsible for urban and rural parts of Benghazi. In
the visited rural areas, the main protection mechanisms
are “tribes and local elites” (33%), in urban areas the
“court and justice system” (35%). Police forces rank
on the third place in both urban and rural areas (25%).
This indicates a preference for less formal protection
mechanisms in rural areas as well as in areas that are
exposed to conflict.
None of the key informants stated that “armed groups or
militias” are responsible to solve disputes. When asked
about informal protection mechanisms, key informants
in both urban and rural areas of Benghazi report
“community watch groups” and “community support
groups” are the main community-based mechanisms.
“Tribal groups” are another main community-based
protection mechanism, but only in rural areas, while
“religious groups” are only mentioned in urban areas.
A decisive factor impacting on the accessibility of
protection mechanisms is the intensity of conflict:
Key informants in 56% of neighbourhoods where “no
fighting” has been observed over the past 30 days
report that protection services are “easily and always
accessible”, while this is the case only in 33% of the
neighbourhoods that witnessed sporadic fighting.
Key informants in Benghazi also report that none of
the schools that are functional have child protection
mechanisms in place, confirming Save the Children’s
earlier SCELTA assessment (SCI 2015), and teachers
commonly lack the specialization to address protection
concerns.
In 50% of the visited neighbourhoods of Benghazi key
informants report the ability of SGBV victims to access
judicial recourse as “rarely and very difficult” or “most of
the time difficult”, while 33% report that judicial recourse
is “always” or “almost always” accessible. Cases of
SGBV are only documented in urban parts of Benghazi
(38% of visited neighbourhoods), and none in rural
areas. All interviewed key informants refused to disclose
the name of the organisations that documents SGBV
cases.
Page 41
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ In 50% of the visited neighbourhoods of Benghazi key
informants report the ability of SGBV victims to access
judicial recourse as "rarely and very difficult" or "most
of the time difficult ”
Key informants recommend that the capacity
of formal and informal protection mechanisms
can be improved by providing (in order of
priority) logistical support, training (including
the training of volunteers), psychological
support, and specifically, child protection
services at schools.
FIGURES:
Figure 40: Percentage of households that requested protection or safety support in in
the last 30 days (HH interviews)
IDPs are more often requesting protection support than resident communities...
As a consequence of insufficient protection
mechanisms, and according to household
respondents, people generally turn towards
family members and friends when they do not
feel safe and seek support, with no significant
differences between IDPs and resident
communities, or between Benghazi and Tripoli.
The household interviews confirm findings
from the key informant interviews that both
IDPs and residents in rural parts of Benghazi
are more inclined to turn towards tribal leaders
when they do not feel safe, when compared
to populations in urban settings. Seeking
protection assistance from UN agencies and
INGOs is not an option for the majority of
household respondents, because they are
either not present, or populations are unaware
about available services. Of note is that local
civil society organisations as protection service
providers rank between community leaders
and religious leaders, according to household
interviews, and especially in urban Benghazi
(3% of respondents).
HH respondents report that IDPs are more
inclined to request protection support (also
taking their higher level of needs into account)
when compared to resident communities, and
especially in rural areas: 57% of household
respondents in rural Benghazi report that they
have requested protection support from a
service provider in the last 30 days, while this
is case for only 33% of residents. Significantly,
the vast majority of household respondents
in urban areas, and especially in Tripoli,
claim that they have not requested protection
support in the past 30 days, however
information about assistance and access to
assistance in those areas was also reported to
be among the lowest of the assessed areas.
Figure 41: Level of satisfaction with protection support received compared to needs
(HH interviews)
Especially female household respondents are generally less satisfied with
protection support received over the past 30 days...
Page 42
“ Key informants in 5 out of 16 visited parts of Benghazi
reported pressure 'by powerful persons or groups' on
them or their families in the last 6 months because of
their active role in the community ”
Appropriateness of Protection Services
One of the main reasons why people with protection
concerns do not turn towards service providers is
that available protection mechanisms are considered
largely inappropriate. In rural Benghazi, 58% of
interviewed households that have requested support in
the past 30 days report that these services have been
“inappropriate” or “very inappropriate” (30% in urban
Benghazi, and 53% in urban Tripoli).
Service Providers Suffering Pressures
The breakdown of law and order in Libya is severely
impacting the work of civil society organizations.
Those reporting on human rights violations are at risk
of assassinations, other physical violence, abductions
and arbitrary arrest, torture and other intimidation
across Libya, especially in Benghazi, Tripoli and Derna.
Journalists and media professionals in Libya are subject
to attack and threats. At least 31 attacks on journalists
have been reported so far this year and five have been
detained, held hostage, or disappeared (HCT 2015).
Consequently, and as noted earlier, most key
informants under this assessment refused to answer
questions around specific protection concerns in
their communities, and talking about them openly is
considered too sensitive. This applies specifically to
the situation in Tripoli, where enumerators under this
assessment were generally unable to conduct any key
informant interviews.
While not being statistically representative, it is
worthwhile mentioning that key informants in 5 out of 16
visited parts of Benghazi reported pressure “by powerful
persons or groups” on them or their families in the last
6 months because of their active role in the community.
Reported types of pressure included threatening
phone calls, threat of kidnapping or death, insults and
verbal attacks, blackmailing, and physical harassment.
Restauration of law and order, and a functional juridical
system, would be a precondition for mitigating these
pressures.
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 43
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
F. Humanitarian Assistance and Access
Key Findings
• Given the high percentage of expenditure dedicated to rent and housing, shelter is first
priority need for IDPs, followed by access to health and food
• Non-displaced, resident populations identified health and food as their first priorities
for humanitarian assistance, followed by protection
• In urban Benghazi, protection needs were among the top three needs of the population
• Quantity (36%) and quality (13%) of aid is reported as insufficient to cover current needs
as stated by almost half of the interviewed households
• With the same level of assistance already being provided, more than half of the
households (56%) anticipates their situation to further deteriorate in the upcoming 3
months
• 48% of the assessed households have not received any humanitarian assistance
although they face needs, while some 40% did not report to be in need
• 24% of the households report that aid is irregular, particularly in Tripoli. There, 10% of
households report that they were impeded from accessing services by “powerful groups”
• In Benghazi, the main challenge to humanitarian access is lack of freedom of movement,
including lack of transport to access aid, lack of documentation and movement restrictions
Page 44
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ In urban Benghazi, protection needs were among
the top three needs of the population, caused by the
significant impact the conflict has had in the urban
areas and limited access to basic goods and services ”
Recommendations
• Cash programmes to support rent and
access to basic services
• Health programmes and access to medicine,
especially for chronic diseases
• Clearance of ERW and implementation of
prevention campaigns
• Training of CSO staff on assessment and
targeting of most vulnerable population
groups, especially in Tripoli
• Communication with beneficiaries and
feedback mechanisms
Priority Needs and
Needs Coverage
Asked to rank their top three priority needs,
households across all assessed areas and
groups identified shelter as their first priority
need, followed by access to health and food.
Given the high percentage of expenditure
dedicated to rent and housing, particularly
for IDP households and particularly in rural
Benghazi, the ranking follows logically. Slight
differences were reported by geographic area.
Evaluating priority needs per group, shelter
is the main priority for IDPs as stated above,
while health needs rank highest for residents,
followed by food needs and protection.
In urban Benghazi, protection needs were
among the top three needs of the population,
which can be explained by the significant
impact the conflict has had in the urban
areas and limited access to basic goods and
services. Particularly in urban Benghazi,
when asked about key priority interventions
desired by the assessed population, clearance
of landmines/ERW and implementation of
prevention campaigns ranked highest after
the re-establishment of the rule of law, which
was the first priority intervention across all
areas and groups. Health needs were the top
priority in Tripoli. Priority interventions ranked
in Tripoli include psychosocial support and reestablishment of freedom of movement as well
as family reunification.
FIGURES:
Figure 42: Top three priority needs for humanitarian assistance (HH interviews)
Shelter is the main priority for IPDs, with a majority of them residing in rented
accommodation...
Page 45
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ In this assessment Tripoli reports the highest percentage
of HHs with disabilities and chronic illnesses,
which further underlines the importance of health
expenditure ”
Households were asked how they would
allocate a fictional 100 LYD cash grant to their
needs. As outlined in the livelihood section,
the main expenditure for all households alike
is food, which is due to high food prices,
instability of currency, and limited income
generating opportunities. Overall, households
would spend 29 out of 100 LYD on food, 22
LYD on health and 18 of 100 LYD on shelter.
Reflecting the priority needs above, IDP
households in Benghazi would allocate a
higher proportion to cover shelter needs such
as cost for renting and housing, whereas
households in Tripoli would pay more to
cover their health needs. As stated above
77% of IDPs rent accommodation in rural
Benghazi and thus require more resources
to cover shelter expenses. The focus on
health needs and expenditure on health in
Tripoli is linked to the fact that hospitals are
both overcrowded with patients and have
severely reduced capacity, following the
massive exodus of foreign health workers
after 2011. In addition, physical access to
hospitals in conflict zones is restricted not only
by the prevailing insecurity but also by fuel
shortages and poor communications (HCT
2015). In this assessment Tripoli reports the
highest percentage of HHs with disabilities
and chronic illnesses, which further underlines
the importance of health expenditure for the
assessed households.
In urban Tripoli, a health facilities assessment
reported that one primary care facility and two
secondary care facilities covering the needs of
the city and the surroundings are not receiving
any support and have no partners supporting
those facilities to overcome shortages (IMC
2015).
Assistance and Coverage of Needs
Overall some 48% of the assessed households
have not received any humanitarian assistance
although they face needs, while some 40%
did not report to be in need. The proportion
of households not requiring need is highest
among residents in Tripoli (50%). The highest
proportion of IDP households requiring aid, but
not receiving any, are also located in Tripoli.
FIGURES:
Figure 43: Projection of living situation in 3 months based on current level of
assistance provided (HH interviews)
51% of households in rural Benghazi expect their situation to become much
worse in the next 3 months with the current level of assistance provided...
Page 46
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
“ Interviewed households indicated that their capacity
to sustain vital expenses is limited and would not last
beyond three weeks, if no further assistance is provided ”
More than 60% of households were aware
of relief agencies sending staff to their
community to ask about their needs, but
often without any assistance to follow,
or access to feedback mechanisms
with regards to assistance received.
Consequently, the interviewed population
often lacks trust in relief actors assessing
needs and builds up frustration with
regards to their ability to access aid.
three months (HH interviews)
With the same level of assistance already being provided, more than half of
the households (56%) anticipates their situation to further deteriorate in the
upcoming 3 months...
% HHs expecting worse or much worse
conditions in 3 months
Al-Kwayfiya
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
During the debriefing process, enumerators in
Tripoli reported that many of the visited IDPs
have received no assistance during the past 6
months, and they have not observed any relief
actors that are providing specific assistance to
IDPs.
FIGURES:
Figure 44: % of Households interviewed expecting worse or much worse conditions in
Hay
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
Sidi
Abayd
Excluded
Sidi
Hsayn
Bu Atni
Al-Salmani
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Raas Abayda
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
The interviewed households indicated that their
capacity to sustain vital expenses is limited
and would not last beyond three weeks, if no
further assistance is provided. Furthermore,
crisis level coping mechanisms are already
being used frequently with an inevitable
depletion of household assets.
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Benina
Al-Hawari
Al-Berka
Al-Keesh
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Magziha
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Nawagiya
Al-Fuwayhat
Garyounis
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hawari
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
% HHs expecting worse or much worse
conditions in 3 months
1
-2
21 0
-4
0
41
-6
0
61
81 80
-1
00
The main sectors where interviewed
households required assistance, but did not
receive any, include psychosocial support,
medicine and health care, and shelter and
NFI. Where assistance was delivered, even
though deemed insufficient, it was in the form
of food, electricity and education services.
Education services were mostly received in
urban Benghazi.
Al-Uruba
Downtown
Mansoura
Not asssessed
Shuhada
Gargaresh Arriada Damoun
Abu
Salim
Janzour
Dahra
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Hadhba
Sherqia
Tajoura
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Sidi
Salim
Ain Zara
Page 47
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
“10% of interviewed households report that they were
impeded from accessing services by “powerful groups ”
Quantity and Quality of Aid
Striking differences exist between sectors
and sub sectors regarding access to
assistance, showing a real disparity
between population in need and population
in normal conditions. Details on percentage
of the assessed population in need of
assistance who received no or insufficient
aid in the last 30 days is available for both
Benghazi and Tripoli in annex 4.
Constraints in accessing aid were also
identified by the assessed households.
Those differ between the different
population groups. Generally, the quantity
(36%) and quality (13%) of aid is reported
as insufficient to cover current needs as
stated by almost half of the interviewed
households. A 24% of the households
report that aid is irregular, particularly
highlighted in Tripoli. There, a striking 10%
of interviewed households report that they
were impeded from accessing services by
“powerful groups”.
Access of Beneficiaries to
Relief Assistance
Almost half (47%) of households in Tripoli
further reported that their needs are being
denied or neglected. One in four IDP
households in Tripoli also reported that
they do not know about any formal ways to
feedback about their constraints to access
aid and the quality of aid received.
the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Households report significant gaps in the provision of medicine, health care and
psychosocial assistance...
Figure 46: % of Households with limited or no access to humanitarian aid in Benghazi
(top) and Tripoli (bottom) (HH interviews)
The large majority of the population in Benghazi have only limited or no access
to humanitarian aid...
% HHs with limited or no access to hum. aid
Al-Kwayfiya
1
-1
11 0
-2
0
21
-3
0
31
-4
0
41
-5
0
Humanitarian Access
FIGURES:
Figure 45: Sufficiency of external assistance received to cover household needs over
Hay
al-Mukhtar
Al-Sabri
Excluded
Al-Thawra
al-Shabiyah
Sidi
Abayd
In both urban and rural areas of Benghazi,
the main challenge to humanitarian access
is lack of freedom of movement, including
lack of transport to access aid, lack of
documentation and movement restrictions.
In rural Benghazi, 15% of household
respondents reported that assistance was
inadequate or of poor quality (17%).
Sidi
Hsayn
Bu Atni
Al-Salmani
Shuhadaa
al-Salawi
Al-Uruba
Raas Abayda
Sidi
Al-Kwayfiya Khalifa
Madinat
Benghazi
Bu Atni
Benina
Al-Hawari
Al-Berka
Al-Keesh
Benghazi
al-Jadida
Al-Hadaa'iq
Al-Magziha
Al-Quwarsha
Al-Nawagiya
Bu-Fakhra
Garyounis
Al-Fuwayhat
Al-Quwarsha
Bu-Fakhra
Al-Hawari
Page 48
Access of IDPs: Access to services is
deteriorating in collective centres hosting IDPs.
In Benghazi, 71 schools are currently hosting
IDPs without any envisioned alternatives or
proposed improvements to the conditions
within these collective centres (UNHCR 2015).
In addition, many of the displaced have limited
freedom of movement beyond their community
boundaries, which impacts their access to
safety, security and basic services (HCT 2015).
61% of IDPs reported being registered with the
local crisis committee, which offers support to
households affected by the conflict under the
MSNA (MSNA 2015).
MARCH 2016
FIGURES:
Figure 46: % of Households with limited or no access to humanitarian aid in Benghazi
(top) and Tripoli (bottom) (HH interviews)
The large majority of the population in Benghazi have only limited or no access
to humanitarian aid...
% HHs with limited or no access to hum. aid
1
-1
11 0
-2
21 0
-3
0
31
-4
0
41
-5
0
Further details for each visited area about the
percentage of HHs with limited or no access
to support in the last 30 days is available in
Annex 5.
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Downtown
Dahra
Not asssessed
Mansoura
Gargaresh Arriada
Janzour
Suq
Al-Jum'a
Bab Ben
Ghasir
Hadhba
Shuhada Sherqia
Abu Damoun
Salim
Tajoura
Hadhba
Alkhdra
As Serraj
Sidi
Salim
Ain Zara
Access of Relief Actors to the
Affected Population
Since July 2014, most humanitarian agencies
have relocated out of Libya, the majority to
Tunisia. The national agency tasked with
leading the humanitarian response evaluates
its own response capacity as almost nonexistent (IRIN 07/08/2014). On-going armed
conflicts and fuel shortages further limit access
for the humanitarian actors that continue to
operate within Libya. The area under control
of IS including Sirte and Derna are largely
inaccessible. For much of the south, a limited
road network, checkpoints, and the presence
of explosive devices pose additional access
issues (ACAPS 2016).
The access to sustained aid continues to be
a major challenge for the population in need
of assistance due to ongoing conflicts and
restricted movement. Neighbouring countries,
including Algeria, Tunisia, and Egypt, have
sealed their borders and imposed more
stringent entry requirements (ACAPS 2016).
Figure 47: Impediments to accessing humanitarian assistance experienced by
households over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Households in Tripoli reported that they were denied access to humanitarian
assistance in the past 30 days...
Page 49
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
“ Enumerators observed a common fear of a longer
conflict between different warring parties, impacting
on the ability of the government to pay salaries, in
addition to the inflation of prices which people feel to
get worse in the near future ”
Indiscriminate fighting has led to movement restrictions.
Since September 2014, conflict in Ubari has blocked
off the main road to Ghat, where a number of displaced
people are staying (IRIN 02/12/2015). On 25 November
Tunisia closed its border with Libya following a suicide
bombing in Tunis, claimed by IS. The Salloum border
crossing between Libya and Egypt has been closed
indefinitely (ACAPS 2016).
Direct Observation by Enumerators in the
Field
During the debriefing process under the PAL,
enumerators in the field reported a number of direct
observations, complementing the findings of the
household and key informant interviews, this includes:
Effectiveness of Health services: Across all visited
areas during the assessment, critical health issues were
observed, and the situation of health facilities was of
concern in general. In all visited parts of urban Tripoli
and urban and rural Benghazi a lack of necessary
medications was observed, especially for chronic
diseases, in addition to the lack of vaccinations. In rural
Benghazi, enumerators reported a general lack of health
facilities and qualified health staff. In urban Benghazi,
enumerators reported the availability of private health
services, but which are generally too expensive for
many people to afford, especially for IDPs.
Public services and WASH: In Tripoli and urban
Benghazi, the majority of the visited neighbourhoods
reportedly suffer from the accumulation of solid waste. A
critical issue observed by enumerators in Tripoli includes
the dumping of sewage water in the sea, which affects
directly the neighbourhoods located next to the sea,
and increases the risk of flies and mosquitoes. In rural
Benghazi, a major problem observed by enumerators
is the absence of water supplies, which often forces
populations in the assessed areas to buy water, which
especially affects IDPs that lack access to economic
resources, often forcing them to consume unsafe water.
Fears and concerns about the future: Across all
visited areas in Tripoli and Benghazi, enumerators
directly observed similar concerns amongst the different
population groups regarding the overall security,
economic and political situation in the country. They
reported a common fear of a longer conflict between
different warring parties, impacting on the ability of the
government to pay salaries, in addition to the inflation of
prices which people feel to get worse in the near future.
Page 50
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Annexes
Annex 1: Table of Figures
Figure 1: % of people interviewed by group and severity category
Figure 2: % of interviewed households expecting ‘worse’ or ‘much worse’ living conditions in the next 3 months (HH interviews)
Figure 3: % of household members with specific needs (HH interviews)
Figure 4: % of household in need (HH interviews, Tripoli: only IDPs)
Figure 5: Number of HH and people assessed (HH interviews)
Figure 6: Assessed areas in Benghazi (KI and HH interviews)
Figure 7: Assessed areas in Tripoli (KI and HH interviews)
Figure 8: PAL milestones
Figure 9: Humanitarian profile Benghazi area (KI interviews)
Figure 10: Humanitarian profile (IDPs only) Benghazi area (KI interviews)
Figure 11: Average household size by geographical areas and groups (HH interviews)
Figure 12: Marital status by population group (HH interviews)
Figure 13: Gender distribution per age interval and population groups (HH interviews)
Figure 14: Highest education degree in interviewed families (HH interviews)
Figure 15: Ability to send school aged children to school (HH interviews)
Figure 16: Perception of safety of schools by head of families (HH interviews)
Figure 17: Children sent to school (2014-2016) (HH interviews)
Figure 18: Primary and secondary school functionality in Benghazi (KI interviews)
Figure 19: % of the total population interviewed vulnerable due to disabilities (HH interviews)
Figure 20: Type of settlement used by IDP families (HH interviews)
Figure 21: Date of departure and arrival of IDPs households (HH interviews)
Figure 22: Main reasons for displacement (HH interviews)
Figure 23: Main reasons for displacement to the current location (HH interviews)
Figure 24: Registration status of IDP families (HH interviews)
Figure 25: Main preconditions for returning to area of origin (HH interviews)
Figure 26: Intention of movement for IDP families (HH interview)
Figure 27: Relationships with hosting communities (HH interviews)
Figure 28: Request to move from current shelter in the last 30 days (HH interviews)
Figure 29: Estimation of current household income (LYD) per month today (HH interviews)
Figure 30: Households three main expenditures over the past 30 days, as a % of total expenditures (HH interviews)
Figure 31: Households usage of livelihood coping strategies the past 30 days, as a % of total times of strategies used (HH
interviews)
Figure 32: Population groups considered most at risk of safety and dignity concerns (Benghazi only, key informant interviews)
Figure 33: Main types of violence or safety problems over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
3
4
4
5-6
10
10
11
11
15
15
17
17
18
18
19
19
20
20
21
21
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
26
28
28
30
31
Page 51
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Figure 34: Perceived level of protecting against any form of violence or safety problems over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Figure 35: Number of family members with signs or symptoms of psychological distress over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Figure 36: Frequency and type of tensions observed in their neighbourhood/village in the last 30 days (Benghazi only, key
informants)
Figure 37: Frequency and type of tensions observed in their neighbourhood/village in the last 30 days (Benghazi only, key
informants)
Figure 38: Level of information about available assistance and support in the community (HH interviews)
Figure 39: Top three issues HH respondents lack information about (HH interviews)
Figure 40: Percentage of households that requested protection or safety support in in the last 30 days (HH interviews)
Figure 41: Level of satisfaction with protection support received compared to needs (HH interviews)
Figure 42: Top three priority needs for humanitarian assistance (HH interviews)
Figure 43: Projection of living situation in 3 months based on current level of assistance provided (HH interviews)
Figure 44: % of Households interviewed expecting worse or much worse conditions in three months (HH interviews)
Figure 45: Sufficiency of external assistance received to cover household needs over the past 30 days (HH interviews)
Figure 46: % of Households with limited or no access to humanitarian aid in Benghazi (top) and Tripoli (bottom) (HH
interviews)
Figure 47: Impediments to accessing humanitarian assistance experienced by households over the past 30 days (HH
interviews)
Figure 48: Sampling plan for HH interview (Benghazi urban, rural and Tripoli urban) and Key Informant (Benghazi only)
Figure 49: % of Households interviewed who received no or insufficient aid in the last 30 days (Benghazi, HH interviews)
Figure 50: % of Households interviewed who received no or insufficient aid in the last 30 days (Tripoli, HH interviews)
Figure 51: % of HHs with limited or no access to support in the last 30 days (Benghazi, HH interviews)
Figure 52: % of HHs with limited or no access to support in the last 30 days (Tripoli, HH interviews)
35
35
36
37
37
38
41
41
44
45
46
47
47-48
48
53-54
55-56
57-58
59-60
61-62
Page 52
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Annex 2: Key References Used for the Secondary Data Review
• ACAPS (2015): Libya Humanitarian Impact of the Conflict, June 2015
• ACAPS (2016): Global Emergency Overview, January 2016
• CURVE (2014): A critical investigation of the impact of internal migration on the city of Benghazi in Libya, January 2014
• FREE FIELD FONDATION (3F) (2015): General report on the Humanitarian Situation in the City of Benghazi, September 2015
• GIEWS (2015): GIEWS Country Brief Libya, June 2015
• HCT (2015a): Libya Humanitarian Need Overview, September 2015
• HCT (2015b): Humanitarian Response Plan, November 2015
• Human Right Council (2015): Writing statement submitted by the Nord-Sud XXI – North-South XXI, September 2015
• IAI (2015): Migrations through and from Libya: A Mediterranean Challenge, May 2015
• IMC (2015): Libya Rapid Health Assessment, October 2015
• IOM (2016): DTM Libya February 2016
• IOM (2015): Migration Trends Across the Mediterranean, June 2015
• IOM (2016): Libya – Displacement Tracking Matrix, January 2016
• MSNA (2015): Multi-sectoral Needs Assessment, July 2015
• MSNA (2016): Multi-sectoral Needs Assessment, February 2016
• OHCHR (2015): Report on the Human Right Situation in Libya, November 2015
• PONTES (2015): Scoping Mission on Migration in Maghreb, December 2015
• SOUFAN GROUP (2016): Libya, Extremism, & The Consequences of Collapse, January 2016
• SC (2015): Save the Children Egypt-Tunisia-Libya Assessment (SCELTA), June 2015
• UNHCR (2015): Operational Update, December 2015
• WFP (2015): Libya Emergency Operation Jan – Dec 2016, November 2015
• WHO (2010): Country cooperation strategy for WHO and Libya, 2010
• WHO (2015): Public Health and Risk Assessment, May 2015
Page 53
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Annex 3: Sampling Plan
Figure 48: Sampling plan for HH interview (Benghazi urban, rural and Tripoli urban) and Key Informant (Benghazi only)
MARCH 2016
Page 54
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 55
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Annex 4: Percentage of Population in Need of Assistance Who Received No or
Insufficient Support in The Last 30 Days
Figure 49: % of Households interviewed who received no or insufficient aid in the last 30 days (Benghazi, HH interviews)
Page 56
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 57
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
Figure 50: % of Households interviewed who received no or insufficient aid in the last 30 days (Tripoli, HH interviews)
MARCH 2016
Page 58
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 59
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Annex 5: % of HHs with Limited Or No Access to Support in The Last 30 Days
Figure 51: % of HHs with limited or no access to support in the last 30 days (Benghazi, HH interviews)
Page 60
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 61
Figure 52: % of HHs with limited or no access to support in the last 30 days (Tripoli, HH interviews)
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
Page 62
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
MARCH 2016
PROTECTION ASSESSMENT
IN LIBYA
This assessment was supported by the Kingdom of the
Netherlands
Handicap International
Contact: Ann Barthés, Head of Mission
Mail: hom@hi-libya.org
Website: www.handicap-international.org/
Save the Children International
Contact: Rania Ahmed- Libya Team Leader/Egypt Deputy CD
Mail: rania.ahmed@savethechildren.org
Website: www.savethechildren.net
MARCH 2016