The Economic and Social Council this afternoon held, in the context of its Humanitarian Affairs Segment, a panel discussion on respecting and implementing guiding principles of humanitarian assistance at the operational level - assisting the affected population.

John Holmes, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, moderator of the discussion, said the selection of this topic was an affirmation of Member States' serious concern about this issue, and a source of encouragement for humanitarian workers that the Council shared their concern about these principles, how they could be adhered to, and how they could be promoted. These humanitarian principles were not just a theory, but had a practical and pragmatic purpose. Humanitarian workers had to respond only on the basis of need, and not based on any other criteria, and upholding this principle was critical so as to ensure that humanitarian assistance was not seen as improper interference, and was accepted by all parties on the ground, with no impediment to populations in need. Respect for these principles was often a question of life and death for those on the ground and had often been challenged - and continued to be constantly challenged.

Dominik Stillhart, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, said the principles that had proven particularly valuable to guide the International Committee of the Red Cross’s work, apart from humanity, were impartiality, neutrality and independence. Whereas humanity and impartiality, in other words alleviating human suffering wherever it may be found without discrimination and in accordance with needs, were objectives shared by many other humanitarian organizations, neutrality and independence were different in that they also characterized their institution, not only their action. They should be seen as a means to an end, namely to obtain and preserve access to all those who suffered from armed conflict and other situations of violence. If they were not seen as neutral, access could be denied, victims would remain out of reach, and their own security could perhaps be jeopardized.

Pablo Macedo, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said the pillars on which international humanitarian law rested were very solid, although at times it may not appear to be so. The major challenge was to ensure that affected populations had what was required in order to survive in a safe and dignified environment, allowing humanitarian agencies to reach people. Today, the major operational obstacle standing in the way of humanitarian action was the lack of a political will to alleviate the suffering of the affected population. There were no universal solutions to the catastrophe provoked by disaster, but there were common criteria, approved by the international community, based on legal norms and fundamental principles that should be respected in all circumstances. The principles of humanity, neutrality and independence were standards of humanity, and were enshrined in international humanitarian law, and inspired by actions taken in the situation of natural disasters.

George Oketh-Obbo, Director of the Africa Bureau, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, said it was important to acknowledge and applaud the fact that, across the world, the system of international protection – a system based fundamentally on humanitarian principles – continued to demonstrate resilience. The truth was of course that there was also a very sad and preoccupying narrative of asylum-seekers, refugees, stateless persons and internally displaced persons the world over being treated extremely badly. Transgressions of the core standards of protection and basic humanity were taking place as a matter of deliberate State policy. Many situations which were commanding the concern of the global humanitarian community, especially in what was commonly referred to as shrinking humanitarian space, were indeed imbedded in the opacity of lack of access; extreme forms of insecurity, risk and danger; and apparent conflicts of mandates or missions.

Sayeed Jawed, Chairman, Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, said the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan was difficult - 30 years of ongoing conflict had left Afghanistan ranked as 174th out of 178 countries struggling with chronic poverty and conflict-related humanitarian needs. Assistance should be provided regardless of political ideas, ethnicity, religion, race, etc. Impartiality was essential - there should be provision of assistance in an equitable and impartial manner without political conditions, and without discrimination, solely on the basis of needs. Impartial and independent actors could only provide assistance in full respect of people's dignity. More effective and efficient aid was needed to meet needs in Afghanistan, and it was very important to focus on where the community was in need of assistance. The militarization of humanitarian assistance and development aid should cease. The fundamental principles of humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality should be respected by all stakeholders in Afghanistan.

Mark Bowden, United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Somalia, said international humanitarian law placed the primary responsibility for protecting and meeting the needs of the population with the parties to the conflict. In the context of Somalia, the issue of respect for humanitarian principles by the parties to the conflict and the respect for territorial integrity and national unity presented major challenges. Most observers would see Somalia as a classic case of a failed State. Despite the external impressions of a failed State there were parts of Somalia where there was governance and Government authorities that were willing to acknowledge their responsibilities. It was important therefore that humanitarian organizations did not use humanitarian principles as the basis for non engagement with Government authorities, but rather that they recognise that engagement with Government authorities was an important element in giving responsibility to these authorities.

Delegations speaking during the panel discussions said the attacks on humanitarian personnel were condemned, and all efforts should be made to stop these attacks and ensure the security of humanitarian personnel. The several factors impeding humanitarian access to those entitled to humanitarian aid were of concern, as they exacerbated the suffering of the most vulnerable. How to reconcile the presence of military forces and the existence of humanitarian space was an important issue. The humanitarian principles should remain the basis of all responses to requests for humanitarian assistance, and respect for sovereignty, territoriality and national unity should remain cornerstones of that assistance - the concerned State held the primordial role in coordination and provision of that assistance.

Speaking in the panel discussions were representatives of Sweden on behalf of the European Union, Pakistan, France, Norway, United Kingdom, Algeria, Brazil, Philippines, Switzerland, Russian Federation, Kenya, China and Finland.

The next meeting of the Council will be at 10 a.m. on Tuesday 21 July, when it will continue its Humanitarian Affairs Segment, holding a panel discussion on addressing the impact of current global challenges and trends on the effective delivery of humanitarian assistance.

Opening Statement

JOHN HOLMES, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, moderator of the panel discussion, said the selection of this topic was an affirmation of Member States' serious concern about this issue, and a source of encouragement for humanitarian workers that the Council shared their concern about these principles, how they could be adhered to, and how they could be promoted. These humanitarian principles were not just a theory, but had a practical and pragmatic purpose. Humanitarian workers had to respond only on the basis of need, and not based on any other criteria, and upholding this principle was critical so as to ensure that humanitarian assistance was not seen as improper interference, and was accepted by all parties on the ground, with no impediment to populations in need. Respect for these principles was often a question of life and death for those on the ground and had often been challenged - and continued to be constantly challenged. The frequency and severity of violent attacks on humanitarian personnel, locations and assets was of great concern - 2008 was the worst year on record for attacks on humanitarian workers, be these killings, kidnappings, or banditry. Humanitarian assets were often soft targets for criminal opportunists.

The difficulties on the ground could be further complicated when non-traditional aid providers, such as armed forces, wished to provide humanitarian aid in order to win hearts and minds. Unless great care was taken, it could blur the distinction between humanitarian action based on need and actions that were neither neutral nor impartial. No one could or should tolerate violence against humanitarian personnel, and this required concerted action from all Member States, parties to conflict, and humanitarian agencies themselves. The understanding between all of the purpose of impartial and independent humanitarian action should be ensured. Compliance with and respect for the fundamental principles of humanitarian action was fundamental to all that was being done and should be done, and the respect that all should have for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Member States.

Statements by Panellists

DOMINIK STILLHART, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, said the principles that had proven particularly valuable to guide the International Committee of the Red Cross’s work, apart from humanity, were impartiality, neutrality, and independence. Whereas humanity and impartiality, in other words alleviating human suffering wherever it may be found without discrimination and in accordance with needs, were objectives shared by many other humanitarian organizations, neutrality and independence were different in that they also characterized their institution, not only their action. They should be seen as a means to an end, namely to obtain and preserve access to all those who suffered from armed conflict and other situations of violence. If they were not seen as neutral, access could be denied, victims would remain out of reach, and their own security perhaps jeopardized. This was why they abstained from taking part in any political controversies, or denouncing crimes they may have witnessed. For instance, they deliberately abstained from expressing any opinion when the International Criminal Court issued a warrant of arrest for the President of Sudan. Nor did they take part in the heated discussions following the expulsion of humanitarian organizations from the country. They did not think that it was for an organization such as the International Committee of the Red Cross to cast an opinion on such issues, which in their opinion inevitably risked jeopardizing their neutrality.

That said, the International Committee of the Red Cross addressed legal questions, with regard to international humanitarian law in particular, through confidential dialogue with all parties concerned, with a focus on preventing or putting a stop to violations, underscored Mr. Stillhart. Moreover, it was indispensable that parties to the conflict saw the International Committee of the Red Cross as being independent, recognised it for its autonomous decision-making process without interference of Governments. This was one of the reasons why the International Committee of the Red Cross worked without armed escorts. In order to maximise the chances for acceptance by all parties, they felt that the International Committee of the Red Cross had to retain its identity as a neutral and independent humanitarian organization. Furthermore, in order to preserve acceptance of their presence and activities, they considered it important to avoid confusion between political, military and humanitarian action. For instance, when a military force conducted humanitarian activities alongside its military duties, or labelled them as such, it could contribute to a blurring of the nature of humanitarian organizations.

PABLO MACEDO, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said this was a key opportunity to improve understanding of the humanitarian area and its achievements and challenges. The pillars on which international humanitarian law rested were very solid, although at times it may not appear to be so. The impact of climate change had led to an increased number of natural disasters, as shown over recent years. There was a special dimension to this trend - if it were stipulated that humanitarian assistance operated in exceptional circumstances, then the conditions for its deployment were limited. The major challenge was to ensure that affected populations had what was required in order to survive in a safe and dignified environment, allowing humanitarian agencies to reach people. Today, the major operational obstacle standing in the way of humanitarian action was the lack of a political will to alleviate the suffering of the affected population. There were no universal solutions to the catastrophe provoked by disaster, but there were common criteria, approved by the international community, based on legal norms and fundamental principles that should be respected in all circumstances.

The principles of humanity, neutrality and independence were standards of humanity, and were enshrined in international humanitarian law, and inspired by actions taken in the situation of natural disasters. These principles had been condensed and codified by the international community - these principles did not operate alone, and were under international humanitarian and refugee law. There was a legal harmony, offering a basis for activity by States and stakeholders in situations of natural disaster. Lack of understanding of humanitarian values led to not accepting offers of humanitarian assistance, refusing to deploy the assistance, or rejecting it after it had been accepted. The main role in initiation, coordination and provision of assistance was up to the State affected. It was a mistake to think that the offer of humanitarian assistance was interference or intervention in the internal affairs of States. The United Nations had the experience necessary to create an open, inclusive and transparent dialogue, and the necessary infrastructure to provide assistance to affected populations.

GEORGE OKOTH-OBBO, Director of the Africa Bureau, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR), said the mandate and mission of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees was fundamentally humanitarian, and as stated in its statue, its work shall be non-political. Its work relied quintessentially on the principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence. Mr. Okoth-Obba highlighted three particular points. Firstly, it was important to acknowledge and applaud the fact that, across the world, the system of international protection – a system based fundamentally on humanitarian principles – continued to demonstrate resilience. Under this system protection, dignity and solutions were continuing to be found for 10.5 million refugees worldwide of concern to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; the 14.4 million internally displaced persons benefiting from the services of the Office; and the estimated 12 million statelessness persons who were the subject of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ activities in this field. Indeed they faced egregious instances of transgressions of the principles fundamental to the international protection mandate, there were telling examples out there of compliance or the determination to comply. These should be recognized, supported, reinforced and multiplied in every way possible.

Secondly, the truth was of course that there was also a very sad and preoccupying narrative of asylum-seekers, refugees, stateless persons and internally displaced persons the world over being treated extremely badly. Transgressions of the core standards of protection and basic humanity were taking place as a matter of deliberate State policy. Many situations which were commanding the concern of the global humanitarian community, especially in what was commonly referred to as shrinking humanitarian space, were indeed imbedded in the opacity of lack of access; extreme forms of insecurity, risk and danger; and apparent conflicts of mandates or missions. Therefore they had to have a more over-arching and complex view of the notion of humanitarian space and of the instances to which their efforts to keep that space open, real and fulsome had to be directed. Thirdly, Mr. Okoth-Obbo joined others in referring to the concerns over the safety of humanitarian staff. Last week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees lost another staff member in Pakistan, the third killing in that country in less than five months. In the week before, a United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees worker was shot and wounded in Somalia. Humanitarian workers were being deliberately put in harm’s way at a level never witnessed before.

SAYEED JAWED, Chairman, Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, said the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan was difficult - 30 years of ongoing conflict had left Afghanistan ranked as 174th out of 178 countries struggling with chronic poverty and conflict-related humanitarian needs. Seventy-seven per cent of the population lacked access to safe drinking water, and 88 per cent lacked access to sanitation. One in five children died before the age of five mainly from simple preventable and treatable diseases. Due to conflict and seven years of drought, 35 per cent of the population did not meet the daily minimum calorie intake, and 54 per cent of children suffered from chronic malnutrition, with a massive four per cent on a country-wide level suffering from severe acute malnutrition. The average literacy rate was 28.1 per cent. On humanity, the NGO community believed in sustainable access - this relied on acceptance, by the people, including opposition elements. NGOs should have the possibility to engage with all the parties in the conflict, in order to negotiate access - if there were no dialogue, then there would be no acceptance by the population, and therefore no sustainable access.

Assistance should be provided regardless of political ideas, ethnicity, religion, race, etc. Impartiality was essential. There should be provision of assistance in an equitable and impartial manner without political conditions, and without discrimination, solely on the basis of needs. Impartial and independent actors could only provide assistance in full respect of people's dignity. Making conditional the assistance to Government control areas undermined the credibility of both the Government and the international community. More effective and efficient aid was needed to meet needs in Afghanistan, and it was very important to focus on where the community was in need of assistance. The militarization of humanitarian assistance and development aid should cease - today, in Afghanistan, private contractors and others were also doing humanitarian and development activities, compromising NGO positions. The fundamental principles of humanity, impartiality, independence and neutrality should be respected by all stakeholders in Afghanistan.

MARK BOWDEN, United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Somalia, said Somalia had to now be seen as one of the world’s most complex of emergencies. Somalia had suffered periodic acute episodes of distress resulting from either drought or flood. The conflict, the breakdown of the rule of law and the near collapse of the governance in many parts of the country had created a further dimension to the crisis through the virtual collapse of basic services. The combination of these three elements to the crisis in Somalia had led to almost 50 per cent of the population being in need of humanitarian assistance. It had also made Somalia one of the countries with the highest levels of displacement both internally and in terms of being a major source of generating refugees into neighbouring countries and internationally. The past month had seen a further resurgence of conflict resulting in the displacement of 200,000 people, leading to a total level of internal displacement of 1.3 million people. In the current context, Somalia was in critical need of humanitarian assistance. The recent revision of the consolidated appeal stated a requirement of over $ 850 million to cover humanitarian assistance needs of which some 65 per cent was needed to cover food needs and their associated costs.

Within the context of respecting and implementing guiding principles, Mr. Bowden observed that international humanitarian law placed the primary responsibility for protecting and meeting the needs of the population with the parties to the conflict. In the context of Somalia, the issue of respect for humanitarian principles by the parties to the conflict and the respect for territorial integrity and national unity presented major challenges. Most observers would see Somalia as a classic case of a failed State. Despite the external impressions of a failed State there were parts of Somalia where there was governance and Government authorities that were willing to acknowledge their responsibilities. It was important therefore that humanitarian organizations did not use humanitarian principles as the basis for non engagement with Government authorities, but rather recognise that engagement with Government authorities was an important element in giving responsibility to these authorities, underscored Mr. Bowden. The Djibouti peace process had proved to be a turning point in the debate over humanitarian assistance and in defining the humanitarian responsibilities of the Transitional Federal Government. Threats to the safety and security of humanitarian personnel remained one of the greatest obstructions to humanitarian access. Abductions either undertaken by insurgents or criminal groups occurred regularly and 16 hostages were still being held in captivity at this time.

Questions

Speaking in the context of the panel discussion, country representatives stressed the need to maintain the line between humanitarian and military or political actors, as well as the need to respect the Oslo Guidelines in humanitarian emergencies. The attacks on humanitarian personnel were condemned, and all efforts should be made to stop these attacks and ensure the security of humanitarian personnel. The several factors impeding humanitarian access to those entitled to humanitarian aid were of concern, as they exacerbated the suffering of the most vulnerable. All Member States should engage in a strong global partnership around humanitarian principles and their practical application in the field. Nevertheless, the role of the State in coordination, provision, and identification of humanitarian assistance remained primordial, as it did in delivery. Did panellists think that respect for the principles of humanitarian assistance had increased over time, or had it been ignored, and how to increase respect for them at the guiding level, a speaker asked. Humanitarian access, based on the principles of humanitarian action, impartiality and humanity, was a principle which should ensure access to populations needing humanitarian assistance and protection. It was a responsibility of States to not restrict humanitarian access when there was a population in need. How to reconcile the presence of military forces and the existence of humanitarian space was an important issue. What could Member States do to move forward in ensuring access for humanitarian agencies, bearing in mind the security situation, a speaker asked.


Response from Panellists

DOMINIK STILLHART, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, responding to questions and comments made during the interactive discussion, said respect for humanitarian principles had been improving over time. One thing was for sure, there was resurgence of these principles in order to obtain access to those in need. However, the problem experienced was a very broad application of these principles by organizations, who did not have the capacity to fulfil these principles. Each actor should stick to its identity in order to prevent the blurring of lines in terms of military, political and humanitarian action.

PABLO MACEDO, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said with regards to the balance between assistance and sovereignty, it was very difficult to address this question in a restrictive way. Ultimately, however, it was a false issue. Humanitarian assistance was not a violation against sovereignty - it was in principle at the request of an affected State. States needed to recognise that they were not self-sufficient with regards to humanitarian assistance. However, it was true that it was useful and good to have assistance that did not go hand in hand with conditions. Affected States should recognise that assistance was not a violation of sovereignty, and was in fact a normal response to an exceptional circumstance, and should be accepted as such.

GEORGE OKOTH-OBBO, Director of the Africa Bureau, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR), responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said with regard to the question raised by Norway on the centrality of gender in operations, across the board this was infused in all policies and programmes of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. On examples of good practices raised by Sweden, in Chad for example, a framework bringing together the humanitarian, military, police and Government personnel had taken place in order to map-out objectives. There would indeed be instances when methodologies and frameworks would need to be mapped out with parties to a conflict that would not have traditionally engaged in such discussions.

SAYEED JAWED, Chairman, Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, said the present situation in Afghanistan was difficult - the international military forces were there to bring peace and pave the road for development and reconstruction of the country and economy, but there was no constructive dialogue between the military forces and the non-governmental organization (NGO) community. There were different layers of military presence called Special Forces, Coalition Forces, ISAF and others, and they aimed to bring stability and peace to the country. In some areas, there were multiple forces, and many of their operations caused displacement of the people, who had lost their access to income, basic services, and property, and were thus spiritually hurt. It was not easy to bring these people back and resettle them. Besides the counter-insurgency strategy, the international community should not expect the NGO community to support such tactics. There should be a dialogue, negotiations and discussions, and the mass displacement of people from their villages should be avoided. During the Russian invasion, NGOs were working in rural areas with the people, and some of those called terrorists today were called freedom fighters then. The same people who were working with them then were still in Afghanistan today to support the needy, and there were NGOs who still had access to certain sensitive areas.

MARK BOWDEN, United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Somalia, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said on the confusion between military and humanitarian personnel, this was the situation in Somalia as well, the debate with the military had been on matters of principle, but hopefully there could be progress on the side of practical needs. With regard to safety and security and protecting humanitarian staff, the key to effective security depended on good and effective information at the local level, which required a far more elaborate security system than they had been able to maintain thus far. There were security measures for staff abductions, there was need to have such common services to serve the entire humanitarian assistance community. On the integration of missions, he said the world was in a new phase, whereas the United Nations system was based on post conflict societies, which was seen as a structural approach to peace keeping missions; now the discussion was based on areas that were in conflict.


Questions

Continuing the discussion and raising further questions, country representatives said the management of humanitarian assistance continued to give rise to situations in which humanitarian principles were put to the test. The principles should remain the basis of all responses to requests for humanitarian assistance, and respect for sovereignty, territoriality and national unity should remain cornerstones of that assistance - the concerned State held the primordial role in coordination and provision of that assistance. To what extent did the proliferation of political, military and private-sector actors venturing into the humanitarian arena pose prejudice to humanitarian assistance, a speaker asked. Accountability was an important aspect - how could the United Nations, besides promoting knowledge and respect for the humanitarian principles, promote accountability mechanisms in that regard, a speaker asked, and if not, another asked, were there such accountability mechanisms in any other organizations. How far should humanitarian actors be prepared to go in the face of non-respect of humanitarian principles, a speaker asked - did they engage in specific dialogues or consider ending humanitarian assistance in the face of this non-respect.

Further Responses from Panellists

DOMINIK STILLHART, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said with regard to the question of increased military presence, this made coordination more difficult. With respect to different actors with different roles, it was important to recognize the differences that existed, and that all different actors clearly expressed who they were in terms of identity, including their respective agendas. In the area of accountability, this had been an area of difficulty for some time; however, accountability projects such as establishing an ombudsman was one example. In addition there was a Code of Conduct devised in 1995, which should serve as a reference for all humanitarian workers who were willing to and able to live up to the guiding principles. With regard to the incident of abducted International Committee of the Red Cross staff in the Philippines, he thanked the Government of the Philippines for their support in solving the situation successfully - all three colleagues were released who had been living in captivity, one for nearly six months. It was extremely important when operating in difficult environments to know the context and have access to all the stakeholders involved. In this example of the Philippines, the staff members were on a mission to visit a prison system – a very normal mission; in this context it was important to have access to the authorities of the Philippines who were pivotal in resolving the incident.

PABLO MACEDO, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said accountability was an interesting word in English, which could only be translated in Spanish to "giving account to", and there was a need to find a word to capture the concept. The idea of accountability mechanisms was a good idea. With regards to the protection of civilians in a situation of armed conflict, there were the Geneva Conventions and the Optional Protocols thereto, and all were familiar with these. Forcing a country to respond to these led to the important issue of coercion in humanitarian affairs. Humanitarian law was based on the concept that humanitarian conventions were to be accepted and applied in good faith, and thus the only mechanism was the Security Council and its ability to impose sanctions. No-one wished this to take place. A legally-binding Code of Conduct was an interesting concept. The question could not be answered easily - it would be good to have a mechanism to guarantee compliance or fulfilment, but this was a philosophical issue that was much beyond the issues under discussion today.

GEORGE OKOTH-OBBO, Director of the Africa Bureau, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said on access and efforts taken to work within accountable frameworks, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees worked in over 100 locations around the world, and in a decisive number of these areas they had access to territories and populations and dealt with challenges of due compliance. Good practices were evident in plain view to see, and should be put forth. There were many instruments for accountability, for instance, in 2003 the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees changed agreements with partners in order to import certain ethical provisions on due diligence, including the principles of non-discrimination and full engagement with all participants and partners.

SAYEED JAWED, Chairman, Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, said with regards to accountability for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and how new actors were impacting on respect for humanitarian principles, in particular the military, the NGO community was accountable to the people whom they served. In confused situations, accountability could be questioned.

MARK BOWDEN, United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Somalia, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said on the Diaspora, they had a significant role to play, and an important one. In Somalia, $1 billion came from the Diaspora. There was a need to find better ways to facilitate the response of the Diaspora. In terms of good practice, there was good practice in Somalia, despite the complexity of the environment. There was a clear move from control of humanitarian assistance to facilitation of humanitarian assistance within the country. This illustrated part of the progress made, and that they wanted to be judged by the way they removed obstacles to access.

Final Questions

In the final part of interventions from the floor, a speaker asked what were the pre-conditions for providing effective humanitarian assistance, as different parties had different answers to this question. Some thought that humanitarian access should be smooth, or there could be no effective humanitarian assistance, but others thought the precondition was the ability for the countries suffering from disasters or the humanitarian organizations and actors to intervene in a timely manner. Humanitarian actors should follow humanitarian principles. Who should remove the confusion, another speaker asked, and who should call the shots in that case? Another speaker asked how the issue of independence was approached.

Concluding Remarks

DOMINIK STILLHART, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said that they should be very clear that humanitarian principles were not an objective in themselves, they were a means to provide protection to those in need. Access alone of course would not do the job; you also needed the capacity to deliver assistance and protection to those in need. In terms of independence and accountability, he was not sure if one excluded the other; they were the masters of their own decision-making process without interference by other actors, he said this was not in contradiction with accountability. At the International Committee of the Red Cross they had this independence, and therefore could measure accountability with the various stakeholders they interacted with, this was a responsibility that they had to be held accountable, not only to themselves and the people they provided the assistance to, but also to the various stakeholders they worked with.

PABLO MACEDO, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said there was a need for three factors to ensure that humanitarian assistance was adequate.

GEORGE OKOTH-OBBO, Director of the Africa Bureau, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNCHR), said everything being discussed today was law-based. It was ultimately about respect and diligence, and the rule of law. Political will was fundamental - the will to actually put the needs of people under stress at the centre of events and efforts. The readiness and willingness to engage and engage in good faith was also vital.

SAYEED JAWED, Chairman, Agency Coordinating Body for Afghan Relief, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said with regard to access and resources, they believed to win the hearts and minds of the people of the non-governmental organization community, it was very important for the continuity and long-term programmes to have access to resources. If there was this access, then it was very clear that they hoped to see change in the area; however, if there were limited resources then they could not reach people in need in time. With regard to access and security and the need for the removal of confusion, the international military forces were sticking to their mandates, and constructively negotiating with the non-governmental organizations community to come up with clear lines for their activities, which in turn removed the confusion in this regard.


MARK BOWDEN, United Nations Resident and Humanitarian Coordinator, Somalia, said it was the responsibility of all parties involved to remove the confusion. This process was taking place at the highest level in Somalia, and steps were being taken to identify all value-added issues for all those involved, and thus there was a process, although it did require good will from all parties to address the issue. With regards to what had to be done to promote the humanitarian principles, these should be seen as providing assistance, not an end in as of themselves. One of the serious constraints in this regard was finance and funding, which limited the ability to reach needs. The debate also needed to be taken outside to the public.

DOMINIK STILLHART, Deputy Director of Operations, International Committee of the Red Cross, responding to questions and comments raised during the interactive discussion, said they should be very clear that the humanitarian principles were a means to an end, and the end was to make a difference for those affected by armed conflict. In efforts to improve the humanitarian space, the reality out there was that some actors were not willing or capable to live up to all the principles, this was not all bad, and there were complementarities that the humanitarian system was able to respond to.

PABLO MACEDO, Director-General for the United Nations System, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Mexico, said there should be a better understanding of the principles not only in the public but also in Governments in order to eliminate misunderstandings.


For use of the information media; not an official record


ECOSOC09023E