ANA POLAK PETRIČ
CYIL 5 ȍ2014Ȏ
full discretion to reject requests for humanitarian assistance by the affect State for the
benefit of its civilian population.
The right to humanitarian assistance cannot be properly fulfilled if it is not
supplemented with corresponding rights and duties of various actors in disaster
relief. They complement one another and constitute a legal framework which
is necessary for the exercise of the right of victims to humanitarian assistance
and at the same time represents a necessary consequence of the right itself.
As already mentioned, it is the primary responsibility of the affected State to
ensure the realization of the right to humanitarian assistance to people under its
jurisdiction. This is in fact an expression of the fundamental principles of sovereignty,
territorial integrity and equality of States. There are two general consequences of this
rule. Firstly, the internal aspect relates to the recognition that the affected State bears
the primary responsibility and duty to protect disaster victims and ensure humanitarian
relief on its territory and has the primary role in facilitating, coordinating and
overseeing relief operations on its territory. Secondly, the external aspect of the primary
responsibility of the affected State implies that international relief operations, their
initiation and conduct require the consent of the affected State.
77
Consequently, other
assisting entities cannot intervene unilaterally; instead they have the duty to cooperate
with the affected State. It must be underlined that all major international documents
in the field of disaster response confirm that it is the affected State which bears the
primary duty and responsibility to take care of the victims of disaster in its territory
78
and that the requirement of the consent of the affected State is a prerequisite to
international humanitarian assistance offered from abroad.
79
However, this sovereign authority of the affected State is by no means absolute.
The principle of State sovereignty cannot be seen as an ‘excuse’ for the affected State
to deny victims access to assistance, especially by unjustifiably rejecting international
disaster assistance offered when it is unable to provide it on its own. No legitimate
State in the contemporary world can object to the claim that it is responsible for
77
ILC, Third report on the protection of persons in the event of disasters by Special Rapporteur. UN Doc
A/CN.4/629, pp. 27-28.
78
Kampala Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa
[article 5 (1)], Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement (principle 3), UN General Assembly
Resolution 43/131 (OP 2), UN General Assembly Resolution 45/100 (OP 2), UN General Assembly
Resolution 46/182 (Annex, para. 4), Bruges Resolution on Humanitarian Assistance [article III (1)],
Guiding Principles on the Rights to Humanitarian Assistance (principle 4), IDRL Guidelines for the
Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance
(guideline 3 [1 and 3)], ILC Draft articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters [draft
article 9 (1)].
79
Framework Convention on Civil Defence Assistance (article 3 (a, b)), Tampere Convention on the
Provision of Telecommunication Resources for Disaster Mitigation and Relief Operations [article 4
(5)], UN General Assembly Resolution 46/182 (Annex, para. 3.), Bruges Resolution on Humanitarian
Assistance [article IV (2)], IDRL Guidelines for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International
Disaster Relief and Initial Recovery Assistance (guideline 3 [1, 3)], ILC Draft articles on the Protection
of Persons in the Event of Disasters [draft article 11 (1)].