It is an honour for me to address this International Conference.
Let me take this opportunity to also congratulate you on the
occasion of the 35th anniversary of the foundation of the International
Institute of Humanitarian Law in San Remo.
The title of this conference refers to the "Application of International
Humanitarian Law, Human Rights and Refugee Law" in disaster
situations. In some such situations, all three of these "big
three" fields of international law most associated with human
dignity and protection may be brought to bear.
This has been demonstrated in the December 2004 tsunamis, which
struck areas with recent or ongoing armed conflicts and existing
refugee issues, and whose aftermath also raised a number of
questions on basic human rights. We therefore look forward to
the discussions at this conference on means to enhance the implementation
of these areas of law where they are applicable to disasters.
However, there are many other disaster situations where these
"big three" fields of law leave basic questions unanswered.
In the absence of armed conflict and displacement across borders,
what rules and principles apply in the wake of a disaster such
as a tsunami, a drought or a nuclear accident?
This past August has been wrought with natural catastrophes
and disasters. These tragedies have resulted in thousands of
deaths and victims. The devastating Hurricane Katrina, after
ravaging Florida, left a trail of chaos, pain and damage in
the States of Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama.
This torrid month of August has also devastated part of Spain
with fires, and deluged Central Europe with floods: Austria,
Switzerland, Slovenia, Croatia and Germany witnessed the overflowing
of main rivers and the weakening of dams and canalizations,
bringing about the horror of death and destruction of homes
and livelihoods.
In many places, the intervention of emergency teams prevented
the disasters from producing a higher death toll.
Is there a right to humanitarian assistance in such situations?
What principles remain where emergency conditions allow for
the limitation or derogation of human rights standards? Is there
an obligation on governments to seek outside assistance if they
are not able to meet the needs of those affected with domestic
resources? Is there a corresponding duty of the international
community to provide such assistance when it is requested?
As far as the Red Cross Movement is concerned, and long since
affirmed by the International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent, it is clear that there is a fundamental right
of all people to both offer and receive humanitarian assistance
in non-conflict disasters and that our Movement and the individual
national societies have a corresponding duty to provide relief
to all disaster victims impartially and neutrally on the basis
of need (Principles and Rules for Red Cross and Red Crescent
Disaster Relief, XXIst International Conference, as revised).
This duty requires us to offer assistance to our own communities
and beyond our borders, on the basis of our Fundamental Principles
and in a spirit of full cooperation with public authorities
and local communities themselves.
More urgent, then, from our point of view, is the need for answers
to the mundane questions about precisely how disaster assistance
should be facilitated, coordinated and regulated.
Without a single overarching framework governing this area,
we have found that legal and administrative barriers to the
entry of international relief personnel, goods and equipment,
uncertainty as to the legal status of international actors acting
in affected countries, and ambiguous standards as to the quality,
transparency and appropriateness of international assistance
remain consistent challenges to our own work and to the effectiveness
of international disaster assistance in general.
The growing concern of the international community with regard
to the actions of States in cases of natural or technological
disasters is clear. And the work that the International Movement
of the Red Cross and Red Crescent has developed and continues
to carry out in such cases, and since its inception, is well
known.
Experience in disaster situations has revealed the need to improve
the international legal framework to facilitate intervention
activities in disaster situations. Long customs procedures for
authorizing the entry of rescue material, difficulties in obtaining
fly-over and landing rights, and restrictions in communications
and for obtaining visas are just a few of the obstacles that
need to be surmounted in order to carry out urgent relief activities
in cases of disaster.
The Federation has therefore embarked on an exploration of the
area of "International Disaster Response Laws, Rules and Principles"
(or "IDRL") in order to clarify and raise awareness of the existing
norms in this area as well as to identify gaps.
IDRL is not and will never be "another IHL" because the premises
and needs are so different when armed conflict is involved.
Yet, IDRL has a similar potential to vastly improve the situation
of persons made vulnerable by vast forces over which they have
no control. I hope that there will be an opportunity to discuss
this potential at this conference in addition to the contribution
the more established areas of international law can make.
We can say that the development of legislation for disaster
prevention and response does not just fulfill a legal role,
but a social and ethical one as well, insofar as it helps forge
what some refer to as a disaster prevention culture.
There must be a frame of reference clarifying the competences
of the various bodies, and above all, establishing the rights
of victims of natural disasters. Let me now stress how relevant
the work currently being conducted by the International Red
Cross and Red Crescent Movement towards the adoption of the
Third Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions is in disaster
situations.
The Movement is becoming more and more internationalised in
the way it works. The willingness of people in all countries
to support people in others was demonstrated to an amazing degree
after the Tsunami.
This led to a very large number of our National Societies offering
their assistance to their sister Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies in the affected countries.
The response showed the world how global our network of National
Societies has become, which is an important factor in the humanitarian
purpose of the proposed Third Protocol.
I would therefore like to conclude by emphasizing the point
that our Movement has made throughout the debate on the draft
Third Protocol, that its humanitarian purpose is paramount.
|
 |
|
News
