CYIL Vol. 5, 2014

ANA POLAK PETRIČ CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ emphasize the role of coordination among actors in disaster relief operations, rather than underlying the rights of individuals. However, States have recognized the right of all people to both offer and receive humanitarian assistance as a fundamental right by adopting within the framework of the International Red Cross two instruments – the Principles and Rules for Red Cross and Red Crescent Disaster Relief and the Code of Conduct for the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement and Non-Governmental Organizations in Disaster Relief. As they both clearly confirm the existence of a right to humanitarian assistance, the recent documents of the IFRC, such as the IDRL Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance, concentrate on the operational part of the provision of assistance, generally avoiding taking a position on this question. a significant proof of the unwillingness of States to regulate the field of disaster relief with legally binding rules is the fact that the initial idea of the IFRC to prepare an international treaty, an ‘international disaster response law treaty’, comparable and equivalent to the legal framework provided under international humanitarian law, was rejected by the majority of governmental delegations participating in the 28th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent. 41 Another recent opportunity for the States to express their views on the right to humanitarian assistance and its implementation was the debate in the UN General Assembly Sixth Committee on the ILC topic ‘Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters’. The analysis of States’ positions suggests that there is no uniform view on the matter. To summarize the divergence of opinion in a simplified manner: those States that preferred tackling the topic from the perspective of sovereignty and territorial integrity of the affected State rejected the existence of the right to humanitarian assistance in disaster response law (for example China and Iran) 42 , while those that focused on the protection of persons and their human rights in disaster situations expressed belief in the right to humanitarian assistance and some form of responsibility of the international community in this regard (for example the Nordic countries, Poland and Austria) 43 . To conclude, the number of instruments, legal and non-binding, which deal with disaster response and include a specific recognition of the right to humanitarian assistance has recently increased, but this does not (yet) amount to the conclusion that the right to humanitarian assistance of the victims in the event of natural disasters can be clearly established by way of the existing international treaties and law (de lege 41 Spieker, H., The Right to Give and Receive Humanitarian Assistance, in: Heintze, H.-J. and Zwitter, A. (eds.), International Law and Humanitarian Assistance: a Crosscut Through Legal Issues Pertaining to Humanitarianism , Springer-Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, p. 23. 42 UN GA Sixth Committee, Sixty-third Session, Summary Record of the 23rd meeting, UN Doc A/C.6/63/SR.23, pp. 5-6; UN GA Sixth Committee, Sixty-third Session, Summary Record of the 24th meeting, UN Doc A/C.6/63/SR.24, p.8. 43 UN GA Sixth Committee, Sixty-third Session, Summary Record of the 22nd meeting, UN Doc A/C.6/63/SR.22, p. 10; UN GA Sixth Committee, Sixty-third Session, Summary Record of the 23rd meeting, UN Doc A/C.6/63/SR.23, p. 3; UN GA Sixth Committee, Sixty-third Session, Summary Record of the 24th meeting, UN Doc A/C.6/63/SR.24, p. 9.