Protection in refugee camps
In refugee camp settings, women’s organizations have had to strategise to and create low-threshold, women-only spaces inside or adjacent to camps.
These may be framed as “women’s centers,” legal clinics, or multipurpose safe spaces, but their protective function is similar: they offer a discrete entry point where survivors can seek information, psychosocial support, and legal advice away from the surveillance of family members, community leaders, or camp authorities. Staff use these spaces to quietly map risks within the camp – unsafe latrines, unlit paths, exploitative distribution points – and to adjust programming, referrals, and advocacy accordingly.
Another crucial approach is survivor-centered case management that integrates legal and protection work. Rather than treating “legal aid” as separate, women’s organizations train caseworkers and paralegals to walk with survivors through multiple systems simultaneously: camp administration, police, humanitarian agencies, and, where possible, courts. Protection planning is done with the survivor, not for her – weighing retaliation risks, dependency on abusers for food or shelter, and the implications of involving formal authorities. Where a survivor chooses not to report, the strategy might focus on relocation within the camp, changes to distribution arrangements, or community-level intervention to reduce immediate danger.
Community-based protection mechanisms led by women are another effective layer. Women’s groups have formed watch networks, accompaniment teams, and peer support circles that monitor specific risks (for example, routes to water points or firewood collection) and intervene early. These networks often include adolescent girls, older women, and persons with disabilities, ensuring that protection strategies reflect diverse experiences. When well-supported, they can shift norms inside the camp – challenging “normalised” harassment, creating informal sanctions for perpetrators, and pushing camp leadership to respond more seriously.
Coordination with other humanitarian actors is also a protection strategy. Women’s organizations that routinely sit in camp-level coordination forums or GBV working groups can press for practical safeguards: better lighting, safe latrine placement, separate distribution lines, women guards at certain posts, confidential complaint mechanisms, and more survivor-friendly procedures in health and registration services. They translate survivor experiences into concrete, environmental changes that reduce risk for many, not just those who seek individual help.
Protection also depends on how information is shared. Effective organizations invest in discreet, ongoing legal and rights education – using small group discussions, door-to-door outreach, or trusted community focal points rather than public campaigns that could expose survivors or trigger backlash. They clarify what services exist, what reporting actually entails, and what cannot be guaranteed, so that survivors are not further harmed by false expectations.
Finally, where possible, women’s organizations work across borders and systems. In protracted situations, they maintain relationships with lawyers and allies in host-country towns or cities, build referral pathways to shelters and services outside the camp, and advocate with authorities and UN agencies for documentation, resettlement prioritization, or protection measures for high-risk cases. None of these strategies is perfect or risk-free. But in combination, and when rooted in trust and accountability to refugee women themselves, they create a protective fabric that is often far stronger than any single formal mechanism on its own.
