12-14 December 2006
Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Report of the
Asia-Pacific IDRL Forum
International Disaster Response Laws, Rules and Principles (IDRL)
Page 2 of 25
CONTENTS
Background .......................................................................................................3
Welcoming Remarks .........................................................................................3
Official Opening And Keynote Address.............................................................4
Special Address ................................................................................................4
Theme 1. Legal Issues for International Disaster Response – Perspectives
from the Field.....................................................................................................5
Theme 2. International Disaster Response and National Law .........................6
Theme 3. Regional and International IDRL Frameworks .................................7
Theme 4. Addressing Outstanding Needs in the International Legal
Framework.........................................................................................................9
Theme 5. Draft Declaration of Principles for the Domestic Facilitation And
Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Early Recovery Assistance ..10
Working Group Theme 5: Comments on the Draft Declaration of Principles.11
Theme 6: Taking IDRL Forward in Asia and Pacific.......................................13
Working Group Theme 6: Recommendations on Taking IDRL Forward in Asia
and Pacific.......................................................................................................13
Concluding Session.........................................................................................15
ANNEX
Draft Declaration of Principles for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of
International Disaster Relief and Recovery Assistance (version dated 2 November 2006)
Additional documents, participant list and photo gallery are located on the IDRL
Programme website:
www.ifrc.org/idrl
Page 3 of 25
Background
The Asia-Pacific IDRL Forum was held on 12–13 December 2006 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, co-convened by
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (‘International Federation’) and the
Malaysian Red Crescent Society and hosted by the Government of Malaysia. This was the second of a series of
high-level regional meetings to be convened by the International Federation’s International Disaster Response
Laws, Rules and principles (IDRL) Programme and its partners over the course of 2006–2007.
1
These Forums
contribute to the fulfilment of the mandate, arising from the 28
th
International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent of 2003, to study and disseminate information on the legal and regulatory frameworks in
international disaster response, identify their gaps and problem areas, and develop recommendations and tools
to address them.
The Asia-Pacific IDRL Forum gathered over 130 participants, representing 21 National Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies, 13 governments and regional bodies, 7 UN agencies, 7 NGOs and NGO networks, the
International Federation and the International Committee of the Red Cross, as well as 11 independent experts
and academics to discuss the common legal issues in international disaster response and potential solutions.
The objectives of the Asia-Pacific IDRL Forum were to:
i)
Review common legal issues encountered by Asia-Pacific actors involved in receiving and providing
international disaster response.
ii)
Analyze the current frameworks for international disaster response to identify gaps in scope and
implementation and to share good practice.
iii)
Develop recommendations on ways to improve the effectiveness and implementation of regulatory
frameworks at the international, regional and national levels.
The Asia-Pacific IDRL Forum also included the first official consultation on the Draft Declaration of Principles for
the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and Early Recovery Assistance (‘Draft
Declaration’), see Annex, prepared with a view to potential adoption by the 30
th
International Conference of the
Red Cross and Red Crescent in November 2007. The draft included in this report was the version circulated and
considered during the Forum but has since undergone a process of revision incorporating feedback from this
Forum and other consultations.
Welcoming remarks
In welcoming the Forum participants, Ahmad Fuad bin Ab. Aziz, Director General, National Security Division,
Prime Minister’s Department, Government of Malaysia thanked the International Federation for offering
Malaysia the opportunity to host this important event and highlighted the vulnerability of the Asia-Pacific region to
disasters. He emphasised the importance of continuing to develop mutual cross-border cooperation, but noted
that various administrative procedures hamper these efforts, hence the need to ensure that legal issues are
addressed to ensure the smooth delivery of relief. Mr Aziz hoped that the IDRL Asia-Pacific Forum would build
better understanding and collaboration on this topic and would contribute to the objectives of the Hyogo
Framework for Action. The outcomes of the Forum, as well as learning from the lessons of the past, would help
shape the policies and recommendations to be approved at the International Conference of the Red Cross and
Red Crescent in 2007 and would ultimately benefit people affected by disasters.
Ibrahim Osman, Deputy Secretary-General, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies, Switzerland echoed this last sentiment and noted a number of concerning statistics about the
frequency and impact of disasters in Asia-Pacific and around the world, many of which have exceeded the
capacities of national governments and required international assistance, such as the Indian Ocean tsunami. He
observed that while some aspects of disaster response have improved, such as logistics, human resources and
technological capacities, unfortunately legal arrangements have continued to lag behind and result in the
1
The first regional form, focused on Europe, was held in Antalya, Turkey in May 2006. The report and documents from that forum can be
found at:
http://www.ifrc.org/idrl
Other forums are planned for the Americas in April 2007, Africa in May 2007, and the Middle East in the
first quarter of 2007.
Page 4 of 25
hampering of international assistance. Mr Osman highlighted some of the legal challenges facing international
disaster response such as bureaucratic and lengthy procedures relating to customs and visas, taxation and the
use of vehicles, as well as issues relating to the lack of cultural awareness and poor practices on the part of some
international relief providers. He noted that existing laws and rules are not well known or applied and, as
demonstrated by the tsunami relief operations, can result in additional complications when ad hoc measures are
put in place. Mr Osman described the various activities which had been undertaken by the International
Federation’s IDRL Programme since 2001, including legal research and case studies, the development of a legal
database, workshops, a global survey and the establishment of the first regional IDRL office in Bangkok.
Additionally, the completion of a comprehensive study on IDRL and upcoming regional consultations in Africa and
the Americas would help to shape the future direction of work in this area. Lastly Mr Osman reiterated the
importance of the IDRL Asia-Pacific Forum as an important step in the process leading up to the presentation of
recommendations and Draft Declaration to the International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in
2007.
Additionally, all participants received a written statement of the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for
Tsunami Recovery, Former U.S. President Bill Clinton congratulating the Forum organisers and reaffirming
the importance of disaster preparedness around the world. Based on experiences from the tsunami, President
Clinton highlighted the impact of rules and procedures during international assistance operations, as either a help
or a hindrance to fast and effective operations and gave his full support to the Forum and in continuing efforts on
such critical issues. The full statement can be found at
www.ifrc.org/idrl
on the IDRL Asia Pacific Forum page.
Official Opening and Keynote Address
Minister Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz, Prime Minister’s Department of Malaysia welcomed the
opportunity for Malaysia to host the IDRL Forum, which would help to raise awareness of this issue among
governments and humanitarian agencies, generate dialogue, harness cooperation and address any gaps. Noting
the significant impact and complexities of disasters and the need for immediate response, Minister Nazri Aziz
stated that a lack of preparedness in the region hampered the effectiveness and timeliness of assistance after the
Indian Ocean tsunami and thus emphasised the need to ensure adequate mitigation and preparedness
measures. In the context of Malaysia, the Minister described the important cooperation between the government
and national organisations such as Malaysian Red Crescent Society and Mercy Malaysia to mobilise teams such
as the Special Malaysia Disaster Assistance and Rescue Team
(
SMART) to provide cross-border assistance, as
was provided in the wake of disasters in Gujarat, Bam, Aceh, Muzzaferabad, Southern Leyte and Jogjakarta. He
noted that the entry of Malaysian Government teams is generally cleared through diplomatic channels and is
assisted by having a clear understanding of the host country’s administrative procedures. However for other
organisations, such as NGOs, their entry is sometimes only possible with a tourist visa and they do not have
adequate safety and protection in the affected country. Thus, when time is of the essence, having appropriate
laws, rules, regulations and administrative procedures in place can make the difference between life and death.
The Minister recognised the need for regional and international structures and mechanisms to address these
issues and highlighted the proposed development of the ASEAN Humanitarian Assistance Centre as a positive
example, and hoped that legal mechanisms to promote the smooth delivery of international assistance could be
the subject of discussion at the regional Ministerial level, which Malaysia would be amendable to hosting.
Special Address
A special address was given by Major General Farooq Ahmed Khan, Chairman, Prime Minister’s Inspection
Commission, Pakistan on the experiences, lessons and recommendations arising from the recent earthquake in
Pakistan. The earthquake resulted in the loss of over 73,000 lives, as well as the significant damage and
destruction of infrastructure – the effects of which were worsened by additional tremors, landslides, trauma and
the onset of winter. Maj. Gen. Khan’s presentation focussed on the challenges posed by the absence of a
comprehensive disaster management system, the relative lack of experience in dealing with disasters of this
magnitude and the lack of an adequate legal framework for emergency situations. He described how the Pakistan
Government established the Federal Relief Commission within 48 hours of the disaster, reporting directly to the
Prime Minister with responsibility for the overall management and coordination of the operation with government
ministries, local NGOs and international relief providers. In his lessons learned, Maj. Gen. Khan noted the
Page 5 of 25
limitations posed by the absence of institutional arrangements for disaster management in Pakistan. However, a
national disaster response plan was developed, which proved critical to ensure coordination and the delivery
relief despite the challenges of infrastructure and environment. Among the key recommendations identified from
this experience were the need to better harness the capacities of NGOs and international relief providers, and to
encourage improved coordination whilst respecting independence. Additionally, it was noted that governments
should allow flexibility in the implementation of normal business rules by cutting any unnecessary red tape in the
event of disaster. In this regard, the Pakistan Government had allowed all relief organisations to enter the country
during the emergency phase and lifted visa restrictions for a period of 3 months, provided access to previously
restricted areas, facilitated the entry of relief goods and made efforts to confront organisations which were not
adhering to acceptable standards of quality and accountability. In relation to future prospects Maj. Gen. Khan
highlighted the need to develop a people-centred disaster management strategy and establish a permanent body
to manage disasters. He noted that a new law was about to pass establishing a National Commission supported
by a National Disaster Management Agency. This would ensure better integration between the different ministries
and tiers of government, as well as civil society and enable “one-window” operations to manage all phases of
disaster from emergency relief to rehabilitation and reconstruction.
Theme 1. Legal issues for international disaster response –
perspectives from the field
Chair: Andrew Nocon, Board of Governors, Philippines National Red Cross Society
Overview of legal issues in international disaster response
In providing an overview of legal issues in international disaster response, Victoria Bannon, IDRL Asia Pacific
Coordinator, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Thailand described some
of the most common legal challenges faced by governments and international relief providers. Based on a
number of studies conducted globally, as well as more recent research conducted in the tsunami affected
countries of Indonesia, Thailand and Sri Lanka, Ms Bannon identified a number of common scenarios relating to
national legal frameworks in disaster. She emphasised that specific laws to address emergency situations are
best developed before disaster strikes and described in more detail a number of the most common legal
challenges. These include: the initiation of international disaster response; entry of relief personnel; legal status of
foreign organisations; the import of goods, transport and equipment; coordination, quality and accountability; as
well as issues related to rehabilitation and reconstruction. Ms Bannon concluded that legal complications and red
tape still pose a serious challenge to the effectiveness and efficiency of disaster response and also concluded
that there is a lack of understanding of and adherence to international standards relating to the regulation and
facilitation of international assistance. However she noted there are opportunities arising in the region as
countries are reviewing their disaster management legislation, developing new regional instruments to enhance
cooperation and increasingly focussing on risk reduction and greater preparedness for disaster.
Perspectives of International Non-Government Organisations
Datuk Dr Jemilah Mahmood, Asian Disaster Reduction and Response Network, Malaysia presented
perspectives from international non-governmental organisations (NGOs) from the region that had faced various
legal challenges in the provision of assistance in disaster operations. She highlighted the increasingly varied but
important role of the NGO sector in international disaster response and outlined the role of the Asian Disaster
Reduction and Response Network in sharing best practices, identifying gaps and building capacities in the region.
In relation to the provision of international disaster response, Dr Mahmood noted that governments have
generally been generous in opening their doors, for example during the emergency phase of the Pakistan
earthquake where 6 month multiple entry humanitarian assistance visas were issued. However there are also
challenges which the further development of IDRL could address, such as: controlling inflation of transport,
Page 6 of 25
personnel and procurement costs; strengthening coordination mechanisms; transferral and management of
funds; improving cultural awareness; visas for longer term recovery work; information management; and
improving accountability to beneficiaries as well as donors. Dr Mahmood stated that improved legal preparedness
and an emphasis on partnerships and consultation between NGOs, governments and other actors at all levels
would make a significant contribution towards improving international disaster response.
Civil / Military cooperation and the tsunami experience
Lt. Col. Evan Carlin, Australian Defence Force discussed civil / military cooperation and the tsunami
experience in Aceh, which required cooperation between NGO and military forces to render effective
humanitarian assistance. However a lack of mutual understanding of mandates and organisational charters and
at times, a failure to adhere to appropriate standards of conduct, can hamper these efforts. Lt. Col. Carlin
described the mandate of the Australia military presence in Aceh after tsunami and recounted a number of
examples where international relief providers had engaged in poor practices, such as: sending inappropriate food,
relief items and personnel; refusal to coordinate; failing to respect the local social and political context; engaging
in religious/ideological conversion; and having a lack of safety or logistics procedures. Conversely, Lt. Col. Carlin
observed, organisations which performed best understood the legal and political environment they were working
within. He noted that the principles and Code of Conduct of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent
provided useful guidance as well as other recognised standards this area, particularly the principles of impartiality
and neutrality; however the political realities and social mores of the stricken country should not be ignored.
Theme 2. International disaster response and national law
Chair: Che Moin Bin Umar, Director of Crisis Management, Government of Malaysia
Role of national law in facilitating and regulating international disaster response
In examining the role of national law in facilitating and regulating international disaster response, Atty. Priscilla
Duque, Office of Civil Defense, National Disaster Coordinating Council, Philippines, gave an overview of
the Philippines Disaster Risk Profile and Disaster Management system. She identified the various laws and
policies which have been developed to address disaster situations in the Philippines, highlighting the role of the
National Disaster Coordinating Council, which involves 19 government agencies, as well as Philippines National
Red Cross. She also described current progress towards developing a comprehensive disaster management
framework. In relation to arrangements for international disaster response, Ms Duque referred to the ASEAN
Agreement for Disaster Management and Emergency Response as well as the Memorandum of Understanding
on the International Humanitarian Assistance Network, which was applied during the recent Philippines landslide
and typhoons, and which identified the responsibilities of different government agencies to process and facilitate
international search and rescue assistance. However, Ms Duque noted, issues and gaps still remain, such as the
dependence on ad hoc arrangements, ensuring that assistance received matches the needs in affected areas,
and the need to harmonise the various laws, rules and regulations for the processing of foreign relief.
Institutional arrangements for international disaster response in Indonesia
Rachmat Ahadijat, Deputy Secretary General, Indonesia Red Cross Society gave an overview of the
Indonesian disaster management system and described the role of BAKORNAS as the inter-ministerial body for
disaster coordination, which also includes the Indonesian Red Cross Society. Mr Ahadijat noted that there is no
single, integrated and comprehensive national disaster law in Indonesia, however there is a draft Disaster
Management Act in progress, which includes several provisions relating to the role of international institutions in
disaster response. Mr Ahadijat outlined a number of existing regulations relevant to international disaster
response, noting that standards existed for the import of medicines and recognition of medical qualifications, that
exemptions of taxes and duties on relief goods were not automatic but could be granted upon request, and noted
the possibility for relief personnel to receive a visa on arrival. In the wake of the tsunami, Mr Ahadijat described
Page 7 of 25
how the Indonesian Government adopted an “open sky” policy and facilitated visas on arrival; however he
highlighted a number of lessons learnt from this experience, such as the lengthy and uncoordinated process of
goods clearance and the lack of assistance from the private sector in waiving warehousing and related charges
for relief goods. Mr Ahadijat also described the role of the Indonesian Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Agency
for Aceh and Nias (BRR), the agency established in the wake of the tsunami to coordinate rehabilitation and
reconstruction, and its role in streamlining the process of visa applications, customs and other legal and
administrative needs of international relief providers. While noting that this was only applicable to the provinces of
Aceh and Nias, Mr Ahadijat hoped that the relevant provisions of the new disaster management law would assist
in the development of more specific and comprehensive guidelines on these issues in times of disaster.
The role of donor agencies in ensuring quality and accountability in disaster response
In highlighting the important role of donor agencies in ensuring the quality and accountability of international
disaster response, Carmel Flynn, Manager International Emergencies, Australian Red Cross used the
example of Australia’s legal and policy framework for overseas aid. She noted that the Australian Government
had recently produced a White Paper which establishes strategies to guide the direction of overseas aid
programmes, including issues of quality and effectiveness. Additionally, the AusAID humanitarian policy
acknowledges the increasing complexity of humanitarian action and identifies a number of policy considerations
to ensure that the assistance programmes it funds address the needs of the most vulnerable. It also emphasises
the importance of having effective evaluation and monitoring which integrate both Australian and international
law. Ms Flynn also noted that Australia is a member of the Good Humanitarian Donorship Initiative which, through
the ‘Stockholm Principles’ provides a number of good practices in donor financing, management and
accountability. She described how a number of prominent Australian humanitarian organisations, including
Australian Red Cross, have also promoted better quality and accountability through adherence to the Code of
Conduct for Australian Aid and Development Agencies, administered by the Australian Council for International
Development (ACFID) and that many humanitarian and government agencies promote and adhere to the
International Red Cross/Red Crescent Code of Conduct. Additionally, Ms Flynn explained the importance of
external evaluations which have directly linked field performance of NGOs to the allocation of government
funding. For example AusAID conducted a review of Australian NGO performance in the South Asia Earthquake
operation, which gave performance ratings based on quality and accountability criteria. Ms Flynn stated that such
initiatives provide additional incentives for organisations to improve their standards and ultimately improve the
quality of international disaster response.
Theme 3. Regional and International IDRL Frameworks
Chair: Lt.Gen Dato' Zaini Bin Hj Mohd Said, Malaysia
Experiences from recent international disaster response operations
In his presentation on experiences from recent international disaster response operations, Dr Puji Pujiono, Head
and Regional Disaster Response Advisor, UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Kobe,
Japan highlighted that two of the most important principles in disaster management are that life is preserved and
protected, and that state sovereignty is the backbone of humanitarian work. Dr Pujiono provided a brief outline of
the evolution of the natural disaster mandate in international emergency response and also explained the roles of
the UN Disaster Relief Office (UNDRO) and the Emergency Relief Coordinator (ERC). Dr Pujiono noted that large
scale disasters can create a high number of casualties and this sudden surge of need can overwhelm local
capacities. This can be further exacerbated by damage to critical infrastructure and communication facilities, yet
governments can still be ambivalent about declaring a need for international assistance. However he also
observed that major disasters tend to result in an influx of unspecified, unsolicited, and uncoordinated
international assistance. This has led to a number of challenges including: arrival of sub-standard relief
commodities such as rotten tents, spoiled food and near-expired drugs; issues with flight and landing clearances;
lack of clarity regarding the legal status of foreign relief agencies; as well as unclear policies on customs and
Page 8 of 25
immigration. In conclusion, Dr Pujiono made a number of proposals to deal with these challenges including
strengthening disaster response preparedness; ensuring adherence to verifiable standards of operation by
international responders; achieving consensus on the international response process; and creating corporate
guidelines for funding response preparedness. He affirmed the importance of the IDRL programme to meet the
needs of these ongoing challenges and emphasised the need for greater commitment to further support the IDRL
programme.
ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response
Dr Raman Letchumanan, Head of Environment and Disaster Management Unit, Bureau for Resources
Development, ASEAN Secretariat, Jakarta, Indonesia was the first of two speakers to present on the ASEAN
Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (AADMER). Dr Letchumanan explained how
ASEAN came to focus on Disaster Management, in turn creating AADMER, after recognising that there were
many declarations and resolutions in existence, but few examples of regional agreements, and those that did
exist were outdated. Dr Letchumanan highlighted that there are a number of disaster risks presently facing
ASEAN member states from poverty coupled with a fast growing population, to natural hazards, environmental
degradation and pollution. One of the main lessons learned by ASEAN from the tsunami experience is that
capacity building for disaster management must be unrelenting and that the commitment to cooperation and
collaboration must be steadfast, thus Dr Letchumanan highlighted the important contribution of the ASEAN
Committee on Disaster Management. Dr Letchumanan also provided an overview of the AADMER itself,
explaining its role as a regional legal framework for cooperation and collaboration in disaster risk reduction and
emergency response. The agreement was initiated in 2004, signed in July 2005 and is now in the process of
being ratification by ASEAN members. The agreement embodies ASEAN’s commitment to effective disaster risk
reduction and articulates and supports the priorities for action in the Hyogo Declaration 2005 and Hyogo
Framework for Action. Dr Letchumanan outlined the main objectives of the AADMER agreement including
preparedness, joint exercises, joint emergency response, prevention and mitigation, technical cooperation, and
also the establishment of the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance. In conclusion, Dr
Letchumanan reinforced that ASEAN Committee on Disaster Management is steadfast in its commitment and
resolve to reducing disaster risk through coordination, cooperation and collaboration. He also stressed that even
though an agreement is crucial for setting out clear roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders, it is the
implementation of these roles in times of disaster which is of key importance.
ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response
Supt. Aziz Ahmad, Government of Malaysia also spoke on the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management
and Emergency Response, focussing on some of its most relevant provisions. Supt. Aziz explained that the
AADMER sets out a number of provisions relating to the responding entity and also provides guidelines for
deployment of resources. As such he noted that the AADMER is particularly important to Malaysia, which has
become a responding nation, and that it reinforces important principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and
national unity. Supt. Aziz noted that the agreement makes inroads on the strengthening of cooperation, especially
in technical areas such as communications, early warning and disaster risk reduction. He highlighted that the
agreement contains provisions for the earmarking, standby and deployment of national assets however the entry
points for these assets still need to be determined. Supt. Aziz referred to Article 16 which covers the transit of
personnel, equipment, facilities and material, and their exemption from duties, tax and charges. He also referred
to Article 20 relating to the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance and its role in facilitating
other aspects of the agreement. Supt. Aziz stressed that a standby agreement such as the AADMER also needs
to be accompanied by a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) which can be adapted to suit all countries, based
on a principle of voluntary participation with no minimum standard of engagement.
Regional Arrangements for Disaster Response in the Pacific
Roger Jones, Member, Regional High Level Advocacy Team, South Pacific Applied Geoscience
Commission (SOPAC), Fiji began his presentation on Regional Arrangements for Disaster Response in the
Pacific by giving some vital statistics on the Pacific region which is home to 7500 islands, 500 of which are
inhabited. There are a number of key development issues in the Pacific such as unique fragile environments,
Page 9 of 25
distinct and diverse cultures, limited natural resources, low economic diversification, geographic extremes,
frequent natural disasters and demographic transition. Mr Jones explained that in the past, disaster management
focussed primarily on national hazards and that response management was poor, mainly due to weak institutional
agreements, ineffective instruments and a lack of incentives. In the 1990s, a regional approach was developed
placing emphasis on structural disaster mitigation and non-structural disaster preparedness programs. In 1995
the Pacific Forum presented a new vision which was that “vulnerability to the effects of natural disasters,
environmental damage and other threats will be overcome”. SOPAC, Mr Jones noted, was established in 1972 as
a Regional Intergovernmental Organisation which has 21 members (17 Island States including Australia and New
Zealand, and 4 associate members). SOPAC is a member of the Council of Regional Organisations in the Pacific
(CROP) and has a regional centre which provides technical expertise, capacity building and support. Mr Jones
outlined the mandate to “contribute to sustainable development, the reduction of poverty and the enhancement of
resilience through SOPAC’s programmes and described the Pacific Framework, which works towards safer and
more disaster-resilient Pacific Island Nations and their communities. The Pacific Framework contains six themes
modelled on the Hyogo Framework and is a comprehensive document covering guiding principles as well as key
national and regional activities. Mr Jones highlighted the outcomes of the Framework thus far, which include
strengthening regional support arrangements, establishing the ‘Pacific Partnership’, and the development of
coordinated support mechanisms.
Theme 4. Addressing outstanding needs in the international
legal framework
Chair: Prof Dato' Sayed Abdul Rahman Bin Sayed Mohd, Malaysia
Overview of international legal framework: strengths, weaknesses and gaps
Dr Katrien Beeckman, Senior Officer Advocacy and Resource Mobilisation, IDRL Progamme, International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Switzerland began theme four with a presentation
titled ‘Overview of international legal framework: strengths, weaknesses and gaps’. Dr Beeckman opened by
stating that there is currently no comprehensive legal regime, but there are a diverse range of legal instruments at
the global, regional and national levels. Dr Beeckman explained that at the global level, the legal framework is
comprised of both hard law and soft law. Hard law is binding, such as treaties, and is mainly sector specific, for
example the Kyoto Convention relating to customs or the Tampere Convention relating to telecommunications.
Soft law represents more instruments of ‘guidance’, and includes resolutions, codes, standards, guidelines and
models. At the regional level, Dr Beeckman noted there are a number of agreements already in place, one
example being the ASEAN ADMER and at the bilateral level there exist hundreds of agreements between states
about cooperation in the event of a disaster. Dr Beeckman noted that even though there is a large array of
different instruments on IDRL, gaps still exist. Regarding hard law, the majority of legal binding instruments have:
1) few parties; 2) limited scope; 3) lack of legal recognition by certain actors; and 4) lack of domestication and
uniformity. In terms of soft law instruments, gaps exist due to the lack of enforcement mechanisms. For both
hard and soft law, there is a lack of awareness and application in the field. All of these gaps, she concluded,
highlight the need for the development of a more comprehensive universal legal framework.
Hyogo Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction: Perspectives from Asia-Pacific
Joseph Chung, Head, United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction, Asia and Pacific,
Thailand began his presentation titled ‘The Hyogo Framework on Disaster Risk Reduction: Perspectives from
Asia-Pacific’ by giving an overview of disaster trends and impacts. Key issues included the number of disasters
the world has experienced in the last two decades, the regional distribution of disasters, the top ten disaster
affected countries, and disaster losses in the richest and poorest nations. He pointed out that there are both
natural and human induced hazards, and when natural hazards are combined with vulnerability, a high disaster
Page 10 of 25
risk is present. Most likely due to climate change, Mr Chung noted, there has been a five fold rise in disaster
events from 1960-1990, predominantly of hydro-meteorological origins. He then gave a brief overview of the
structure and systems of UNISDR whose objective is to reduce disaster risk worldwide, focussing on nations and
communities. Mr Chung went on to speak on the Hyogo Framework for Action 2005-2015 (HFA) which is the
main instrument of UNISDR. The HFA is the primary international agreement among 168 countries and multi-
lateral institutions whose three strategic goals are the following: to integrate disaster risk reduction into policies,
plans and programmes of sustainable development and poverty reduction; to recognize risk reduction as both a
humanitarian and development issue – in the context of sustainable development; and to focus on national
implementation, with bilateral, multilateral, regional and international cooperation. Mr Chung then summarized
the HFA and its five ‘priorities for action’: governance, risk identification, knowledge, reducing the underlying risk
factors, and strengthening disaster preparedness for effective response at all levels. He concluded by outlining
some of the main challenges of HFA implementation, explaining that states are responsible for the welfare and
safety of their people, so they must create appropriate legal, socio-economic, political and physical environments
for mainstreaming disaster risk reduction into the development process at all levels of society.
Customs and relief goods
Yoko Odashima, Deputy Head, Asia Pacific Regional Office for Capacity Building, World Customs
Organisation, Thailand concluded theme 4 with a presentation on customs and relief goods and opened by
giving an overview of the World Customs Organisation (WCO). The WCO originated at the Customs Co-operation
Council in Brussels in 1952 and was giving the working name WCO in 1994. It is an independent
intergovernmental organization whose mission is ‘efficient and effective customs’. The WCO has 170 Member
Customs Administrations covering 99% of world trade. More specifically, Ms Odashima explained, the WCO Asia
Pacific Regional Office for Capacity Building (WCO ROCB A/P) in Bangkok strives to build capacity of the 31
Member Customs Administrations in the region, including 23 developing countries. Ms Odashima then spoke on
the Revised Kyoto Convention which is one of the main instruments of the WCO. The original convention was
concluded in Kyoto, Japan in 1973 and was revised in 1999 before entering into force in February 2006. This
convention is the blueprint for modern customs administrations and its core principles are: higher transparency
and predictability; standardized and simplified documents; minimum requests and intervention; maximum use of
information technology; and finally, greater co-operation with other agencies and foreign counterparts. In
recognition of the significance of rapid clearance of relief consignment and to support and contribute to the efforts
made in the interest of humanity to assist victims of disasters, the Convention contains a separate Chapter on the
subject. Specific Annex J, Chapter 5 outlines the provisions that the Customs administrations should establish.
Ms Odashima also spoke on the Istanbul Convention which entered into force in 1993 relating to temporary
admission of certain goods. Temporary admission applies to a range of imports that are known to be re-exported
in the same state (eg. goods for exhibition and professional equipment) for which customs allows duty-free entry
with simplified formalities. The Convention contains a separate Annex on the subject - Annex B9 for good for
Humanitarian purposes outlines the provisions that customs administrations should establish. In conclusion, she
noted that the WCO strives to contribute to capacity building of members by raising awareness of WCO
conventions and through the provision of relevant training.
Theme 5. Draft Declaration of Principles for the Domestic
Facilitation and Regulation of International Disaster Relief and
Early Recovery Assistance
Chair: Dr Simon Missiri, Head of Asia Pacific Regional Department, International Federation of Red Cross
and Red Crescent Societies, Switzerland
Presentation on Draft Declaration
Page 11 of 25
David Fisher, Senior Legal Research Officer, IDRL Programme, International Federation of Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, Switzerland opened theme 5 with a presentation titled ‘The Draft IDRL
Declaration: Guidelines for National Legislation and Practice.’ Mr Fisher first gave an explanation of the IDRL
mandate based on the 28
th
International Conference held in 2003. The mandate is to: improve awareness and
application of existing international norms; work with States to review existing disaster management laws; identify
outstanding needs in the legal and regulatory framework and develop models, tools and guidelines; and to report
to the International Conference in 2007. Mr Fisher explained the various research and consultation activities
conducted by the IDRL Programme. The findings of this work have shown that there are a consistent set of legal
problems, such as customs, visas, coordination and inappropriate and poor quality of aid, and further, that these
problems are mostly technical, unintentional, amenable to solution - but not easy to place on the legislative
agenda. Mr Fisher explained that the numbers of disasters and people affected are increasing, creating a parallel
demand to respond more effectively and efficiently. Many things are changing in the international disaster
response community explained Mr Fisher, such as a transforming role of the UN, scaling up of the International
Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, expansion of the NGO sector, and increasing involvement of militaries
and the private sector. Despite all of these changes, both the international legal framework and most domestic
law remain unprepared for the legal problems of international relief. Mr Fisher went on to give an overview of the
proposed Draft Declaration which would: provide non-binding guidance for national law; reaffirm the primary role
of the affected state government; compile and reaffirm existing international norms; suggest facilities that are
needed to ensure effective and efficient assistance; and link to compliance with minimum standards. As a lead
up to the 30
th
International Conference, to be held in Geneva in 2007, there is an ongoing consultation process
which is happening through a series of regional forums, one being the Asia-Pacific Forum. Mr Fisher concluded
his presentation by highlighting the main definitions and five key provisions of the draft d eclaration which are core
responsibilities, preparedness and early warning, initiation and termination, designation, and legal facilities for
entry and operations.
Comments from Expert Panelist
C. Raj Kumar, Assistant Professor and Juris Doctor Programme Leader, School of Law, City University of
Hong Kong gave a presentation commenting on the Draft Declaration as an expert panellist. Prof. Kumar began
by noting the importance of addressing the outstanding needs in the area and the contribution which could be
made through the Draft Declaration. He highlighted a number of aspects which the Draft Declaration should bear
in mind for further discussion in the lead up to the 30
th
International Conference of the Red Cross and Red
Crescent. These points include issues relating to: corruption in aid distribution, special protection for vulnerable
populations, discrimination and rights violations, legal empowerment of the poor and property rights, and role and
functions of NGOs and civil society. He suggested that there is scope for further development in Principle 1
based on the notion of “sovereignty as responsibility” which has already been well developed in the report The
Responsibility to Protect, prepared by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty
(ICISS). He also noted that states may not only seek international assistance once a disaster has struck, but also
may prepare beforehand when they are able to reasonably predict that a disaster situation may occur. In this
case, he noted, states can ensure that international actors are better prepared to respond and are given the
necessary information regarding the state’s capacity to deal with disasters. Prof. Kumar then gave specific
comments on a number of points in each section of the declaration. His full set of comments can be found in his
paper, which can be accessed at
www.ifrc.org/idrl
on the IDRL Asia Pacific Forum page.
Working Group Theme 5: Comments on the Draft Declaration
of Principles
The participants were divided into working groups and were asked to address questions relating to one of three
topics on the Draft Declaration. At the conclusion of the discussion, the working groups for each topic reported
their conclusions to a designated rapporteur who presented consolidated conclusions to the plenary on each
Page 12 of 25
topic. A more specific outline of the working group questions and a synthesis of the specific points raised can be
accessed on the IDRL website at
www.ifrc.org/idrl
on the IDRL Asia Pacific Forum page.
A number of general comments from the working groups have been summarised below.
Structure of the Draft Declaration
§
It was suggested to add a preamble at the beginning of the document, which would refer to relevant
international agreements and standards eg. Sphere and Code of Conduct.
§
The beginning of the document should also emphasise that it is non-binding.
§
It was suggested that the body of the Declaration be limited to general principles and that the more detailed
provisions be included in an annex.
Application of the Draft Declaration to different actors
§
It was recommended to define the term “international actor” and cross-check its use throughout the
document for consistency.
§
There was concern about the definition of International Humanitarian Organisation, which groups together a
number of organisations with different statutes, mandates and modus operandi.
§
In particular, it was queried whether the UN was included within the definition of an International
Humanitarian Organization and if so, whether it would be possible to comply with some of the principles. For
example, would it be possible for the UN to be impartial and neutral when working through governments? It
was noted that the Convention on Privileges and Immunities for UN Personnel would also need to be
reflected in the documents, particularly in the context of compliance with national law.
§
It was asked whether the principles should also address more directly the accountability and standards
applicable to Affected States.
§
When using terms such as humanity, impartiality and neutrality, it was suggested that more precise
definitions be given, as many organisations have their own understanding about their meaning.
§
It was also queried whether the Declaration a whole was applicable to the media and also to the military –
and if so, whether these requirements could be fulfilled by those groups.
Implementation of the Draft Declaration
§
The recommendation was made to support the Draft Declaration through the development of model
legislation.
§
It was suggested to link / integrate implementation and follow up processes as part of various provisions. For
example, Principle 10 concerning the opening of office hours of State-operated offices and services, should
be more directly linked to and articulated within principle 3(3) relating to the designation of national disaster
management focal points.
§
The issue was raised about the implementation of the principles by private companies or other non-state
actors – many of which deal directly with issues such as customs processing, warehousing, goods handling
and port management. Would States be required to compel companies to abide by principles, for example by
requiring them to waive fees and processes?
§
Concern was raised about the ability of Affected States with limited capacities to be able to implement the
various provisions contained within the Declaration, for example the granting of exemptions and facilities,
which would require additional resources and training to ensure compliance by the relevant authorities. This
was thought to be particularly challenging in the immediate aftermath of a disaster.
§
It was recommended that Governments would need to be made more aware of existing quality and
accountability standards before they can effectively implement them.
Page 13 of 25
§
It was noted that there was no method for resolving disagreements between International Humanitarian
Organisations and governments about the application and implementation of Principle 2, which sets out a
number of responsibilities and standards for international actors.
§
It was also recommended that the principles include the establishment of a “one stop” agency to facilitate
implementation, such as the processing of relief goods, visas and other administrative needs of international
relief providers.
Theme 6: Taking IDRL forward in Asia and Pacific
Chair: Umesh Dhakal, Executive Director, Nepal Red Cross
The working groups reconvened to discuss three topics relating to “Taking IDRL Forward in Asia and Pacific”. A
rapporteur from each group was asked to give a brief presentation on their recommendations to the plenary,
summarised below.
Working Group Theme 6: Recommendations on taking IDRL
forward in Asia and Pacific
Topic 1: Opportunities and challenges for taking IDRL forward in the Asia and Pacific Region
–
What is the best way to encourage the development of well-prepared national laws?
–
What existing projects, mechanisms and processes might be tapped to promote attention to IDRL?
Recommendations
§
Advocacy activities on legal preparedness should be targeted more directly towards legislators, for example
through national or regional forums tailored to national government policy makers.
§
The substance of the advocacy activities should address the key issues of concern for governments, and not
just the humanitarian sector. It should identify the main incentives for governments to implement change and
encourage them to make IDRL a priority. The Tsunami Evaluation Committee Report was seen as an
important document which raises many IDRL issues of concern to governments and could be a useful
reference point.
§
Ensuring availability of information was also seen as critical for encouraging legal developments, for example
through regularly updated websites and by translating key documents into local languages for greater
accessibility in different country contexts.
§
The International Federation should continue its efforts through National Societies to consult with
governments at the national level, on IDRL both with disaster managers and policy makers.
Page 14 of 25
Topic 2: Resources and activities different stakeholders can contribute to the work on IDRL
–
How can states, national societies, UN agencies and NGOs take this issue forward?
–
What role can regional organizations play in promoting IDRL?
Recommendations
§
At the regional level, it was recommended that advocacy and consultation on IDRL be incorporated into
existing platforms, such as the implementation of the Hyogo Framework for Action and activities of the World
Customs Organisation and that partnerships between all relevant stakeholders be developed to ensure a
consistent and coordinated approach – in particular UN, NGOs and governments.
§
At the sub-regional level, the importance of engaging with bodies such as ASEAN was emphasised to ensure
that IDRL issues had a continuing presence on their agendas and are included in activities such as cross-
border simulation exercises and legal reviews. These bodies were also seen as important for encouraging
ratification of specific regional instruments or policies.
§
It was suggested also that the participants of the current IDRL Asia-Pacific Forum take steps to “cascade”
IDRL materials and information to their sub-regional level.
§
Additionally recommendations were made to convene a series of sub-regional groups or forums comprised of
legislators and other experts, to promote dialogue and change at the national level.
§
At the national level, different ministries and non-government partners should work together to develop
national action plans on IDRL.
§
The diplomatic community was also seen as key target group – for example, embassies from countries
outside of the Asia Pacific region which have a strong interest in disaster management activities could be key
supporters and promoters of IDRL in the region and could assist in activities at the national level.
§
Finally, it was recommended that efforts be made to circulate the Draft Declaration as widely and early as
possible before the International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent in 2007 to ensure there is
adequate time for consultation and to generate support.
Topic 3: Additional tools needed to support work on IDRL
–
What additional support should the Federation and/or other international actors provide to governments and
other domestic actors to assist them in addressing IDRL issues?
–
Would model legislation be helpful?
Recommendations
§
The International Federation was identified as a regional leader to initiate forums with different national
government agencies to discuss relevant IDRL issues: customs, immigration, police, military, ministries of
foreign affairs, disaster management departments.
§
It was recommended that the International Federation also assist with the development of certified courses
and training programmes for individuals / agencies wishing to become more familiar with the subject.
§
The establishment of a database of individuals and organisations within the region who could be called on for
technical advice and support on IDRL was also suggested.
§
A secure funding base for IDRL activities was also recommended and donors could be encouraged to
contribute through increased advocacy and the identification of a “celebrity ambassador”.
§
On the issue of model legislation, many groups felt that it would be a useful tool for identifying the various
technical requirements and as an advocacy tool for promoting legislative change.
§
However, concern was expressed about whether model legislation could adequately account for different
country contexts. In such cases, it would serve as a checklist, rather than as a model for implementation.
Page 15 of 25
Concluding session
Hisham Harun Hashim, Deputy National Chairman, Malaysian Red Crescent Society gave the first address
of the closing ceremony. He commented that the two day Forum was a successful consultative session at all
levels, on pertinent topics surrounding improving international disaster response. He noted that the Forum was
successful in identifying common issues and challenges faced by actors in cross border relief and in providing
recommendations on overcoming and resolving issues. Speaking from a National Society perspective, as a
member of the Federation, and on behalf of all the National Societies present, Mr Hashim expressed that in a
region exposed to disasters, a Forum such as this one can contribute to better understanding of the work of
volunteers and staff in disaster response. As these National Societies are auxiliary to their governments, Mr
Hashim commented, they are fit to lend an edge in the creation of a more amicable atmosphere for those who
need to respond to disasters. He highlighted that we all have a common objective, and that is to alleviate the
suffering of the most vulnerable. Mr Hashim thanked the International Federation for selecting Malaysia as a host
country, and thanked the Government of Malaysia for being the generous host of the Forum. He concluded by
stating that the effort not only contributed to the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, but to the
cause of humanitarian assistance worldwide. He closed in thanking the organizing committee and all of the
volunteers for their efforts in making the Forum as success.
Ibrahim Osman, Deputy Secretary General, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies, Geneva, Switzerland delivered closing remarks on behalf of the International Federation. He noted
that the presence of such a large number of stakeholders shows that we are calling on each other in the face of
problems and that, though our collective efforts, we are able to produce something that would be helpful to all in
humanitarian assistance. He noted the good progress that was made in the Forum, namely that participants were
introduced to the various dimensions of the legal framework, that it brought a number of issues and instruments
to light, and contributed new knowledge and new experience. Mr Osman commented that there are a number of
issues to take forward, and with the momentum that has been created, now is the time to reflect and share with
other international and regional organizations. He hoped that the outcomes of this Forum and of upcoming
Forums in Africa and the Americas will contribute to the work of many different kinds of actors. Mr Osman
highlighted a particular suggestion from the Forum participants to have similar workshops at the national level,
creating a small think-tank of different stakeholders, especially governments and offered the support of the
International Federation in doing so. This would generate additional substantive international discussions in the
lead up to the International Conference. Mr Osman noted the many positive comments from participants at this
event and thanked everyone for their willingness to share their experiences, knowledge and wisdom. Mr Osman
concluded by expressing his thanks to the Malaysian Government for welcoming and hosting the meeting and to
the Malaysian Red Crescent leadership, staff and volunteers in organising the event. Finally he thanked Major
General Farooq Khan for sharing the issues and lessons learnt in the Pakistan earthquake as well as the staff of
the International Federation Asia Pacific Service Center and from Geneva.
The closing speech was given by
Ahmad Fuad bin Ab. Aziz, Director General, National Security Division,
Prime Minister’s Department, Government of Malaysia.
He highlighted that the participants have invested
precious time in learning and discussing international law, and it is evident that many issues need to be
addressed in this area. He noted that the administrative procedures with regard to cross border coordination can
sometime hamper efforts of aid, and even though some disasters are addressed individually by each government,
some need international help. Mr Aziz expressed that he believes this Forum has been an excellent platform in
facilitating legal procedures, and that there is a need for more harmonization of laws – at the national, regional
and international levels. He noted that during the Forum, there were also discussions on issues of funds transfer
from one country to another – and although the main purpose of law is to protect people from illegal funds (money
laundering), this can however hamper inflow of much needed relief funds. He highlighted that the IDRL Forum’s
purpose to review common legal issues and best practices. In identifying the next steps, he stated that the
challenge is to ensure that all the ideas from the Forum materialize and are included on an international platform
in order to benefit those who need it. Even though this process of improving laws could take years, he said, it is
all worthwhile in order to save human lives. Mr Aziz believed this is a step forward, and that the outcomes and
recommendations will be submitted by the Federation to the International Conference in 2007 so that this need
can be heard. He congratulated the International Federation and Malaysian Red Crescent Society for organizing
Page 16 of 25
this Forum, which added a new different dimension to previous forums. He expressed his admiration for the work
of the International Federation on IDRL, and thanked the Secretariat for making the Forum successful. He
concluded by thanking all of the participants for attending and sharing their ideas and experiences and officially
closed the Forum.
Page 17 of 25
ANNEX
NOTE: This Draft is the version dated 2 November 2006, circulated during the IDRL Asia Pacific Forum.
It is currently under a process of revision to incorporate feedback from this Forum and other consultations.
Draft Declaration of Principles for the Domestic Facilitation and Regulation of
International Disaster Relief and Early Recovery Assistance
Definitions
For the purposes of these Principles,
(a) “Affected State” means the State upon whose territory persons or property are
affected by a disaster.
(b) “Assisting State” means a State providing disaster relief or early recovery assistance,
including both civil and military components.
(c) “Designated International Humanitarian Organization” means an International
Humanitarian Organization that has been approved pursuant to Part IV to receive legal
facilities pursuant to Part V of these principles.
(d) “Disaster” means a serious disruption of the functioning of society which poses a
significant, widespread threat to human life, health, property or the environment, whether
arising from accident, nature or human activity, whether developing suddenly or as the result
of long-term processes, and to which international humanitarian law does not apply.
(e) “Disaster relief” means assistance and support designed to meet the immediate needs
of persons due to a disaster.
(f) “Early recovery” means assistance and support designed to restore or improve, to a
defined level, the pre-disaster living conditions of the stricken community, including
initiatives to increase resilience and reduce risk, provided for up to a maximum of one year
after the immediate needs of disaster-affected persons have been met.
(g) “International Humanitarian Organization” means entities whose mandate and
activities are primarily focused on humanitarian relief, recovery or development, including:
relevant organs and agencies of the United Nations; other international organizations such as
the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and the International
Committee of the Red Cross; national Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies headquartered
outside of the Affected State; and non-governmental organizations headquartered outside of
the Affected State.
(h) “Originating State” means the State from which disaster relief and early recovery
personnel, goods and equipment begin travel to the Affected State.
(i) “Relief or early recovery goods and equipment” means the goods intended to be
provided to the disaster-affected population for its relief or early recovery and the equipment
(including vehicles and means of communication) necessary to undertake disaster relief or
early recovery operations.
Page 18 of 25
(j) “Relief or early recovery personnel” means the staff and volunteers of international
actors providing disaster relief or early recovery assistance.
(k) “Transit State” means the State through whose territorial jurisdiction disaster relief or
early recovery assistance passes on its way to or from the Affected State in connection with
disaster relief or early recovery operations.
Part I: Core Responsibilities of States and International Actors
Principle 1
1. Affected States have the primary responsibility to provide or arrange for disaster relief
and recovery within their borders. National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, as
auxiliaries to the public authorities in the humanitarian field, and other domestic civil society
actors, play a key supporting role.
2. Affected States have the sovereign right to coordinate, monitor and regulate disaster
relief and recovery assistance provided by international actors within their borders, consistent
with humanitarian principles and international law.
3. In order to ensure that the needs of affected persons are met, Affected States should
seek assistance from international actors when a disaster situation exceeds national coping
capacities. Affected States should provide these actors with relevant information in their
possession to ensure the effectiveness of that assistance, including information about
applicable domestic laws and regulations.
Principle 2
1. International actors should ensure that all of their disaster relief and early recovery
assistance is:
(a)
Allocated solely in proportion to needs, consistent with the principle of
humanity, and on the basis of objective needs assessments;
(b)
Provided without any adverse distinction (including as to nationality, race,
religious beliefs, class, gender and political opinions) to all persons in need, consistent with
the principle impartiality;
(c)
Provided without furthering a particular political or religious standpoint,
consistent with the principle of neutrality;
(d)
Provided in accordance with applicable national and international law and in
coordination with the responsible authorities of the Affected State and other relevant domestic
actors and international actors; and
(e)
Commensurate with the expertise of their personnel and their organizational
capacities.
Page 19 of 25
2. To the greatest extent practicable, international actors’ disaster relief and early
recovery activities should also be:
(a)
Culturally appropriate, adequate for the material needs of affected persons and
in compliance with any applicable international standards of quality;
(b)
Responsive to the special needs, if any, of particularly vulnerable groups,
which may include displaced persons, women, children, the disabled, persons living with HIV
and other debilitating illnesses and the elderly;
(c)
Carried out with adequate involvement of affected persons in their design,
implementation, monitoring and evaluation;
(d)
Building upon and strengthening local disaster relief and recovery capacities;
and
(e)
Carried out so as to avoid negative impacts on the local economy and markets.
Part II: Preparedness and Early Warning
Principle 3
1. As an essential element of disaster preparedness, States should adopt comprehensive
legal, policy, and institutional frameworks for disaster risk reduction, relief and early recovery
which take full account of the auxiliary role of national Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
and are inclusive of domestic civil society. States, with the support, as appropriate, of
relevant international organizations, should devote adequate resources to ensure the
effectiveness of these frameworks.
2. These frameworks should also adequately address the initiation, facilitation, transit
and regulation of international disaster relief and early recovery assistance consistent with
these principles.
3. National disaster management mechanisms and focal points should be clearly
designated and accorded appropriate authority and capacity to ensure the coordination,
facilitation and monitoring of international assistance and to liaise between international and
government actors at all levels.
Principle 4
1. With a view to reducing the need for international assistance in disaster relief and
early recovery, the international community should support States and national Red Cross and
Red Crescent Societies, where requested, to build their capacities to mitigate and respond to
disasters within their own borders.
2. The international community should also support States to develop the capacity to
adequately implement legal and regulatory frameworks to facilitate internationald relief and
Early recovery assistance.
Principle 5
Page 20 of 25
All States should ensure that procedures are in place to facilitate the expeditious sharing of
information about disasters, including emerging disasters, with other States and the
international community, including the United Nations’ Emergency Relief Coordinator, in
order to minimize transboundary impacts and maximize the effectiveness of any international
assistance that might be required.
Part III: Initiation and Termination of International Disaster Relief and Early
Recovery Assistance
Principle 6
1. Disaster relief or early recovery assistance should be initiated either on the basis of a
request by the Affected State or through acceptance by the Affected State of an offer from an
international actor. Both offers and requests should be as specific as possible.
2. The Affected State should decide without undue delay whether or not to request or
accept offers of disaster relief or early recovery assistance.
Principle 7
When an Affected State or an international actor wishes to terminate disaster relief or early
recovery assistance, it should provide adequate notice and then arrange to bring the assistance
to an orderly conclusion under the terms of these principles, bearing in mind the impact of
such termination on the risk to human life and ongoing disaster relief and early recovery
operations.
Part IV: Designation
Principle 8
1. Transit and Affected States should provide, at minimum, the legal facilities described
in Part V to Assisting States with respect to their disaster relief and early recovery assistance.
2. Originating, Transit and Affected States should likewise provide, at minimum, the
legal facilities described in Part V to Designated International Humanitarian Organizations as
set out below with respect to their disaster relief and early recovery assistance.
(a)
Prior to the onset of a disaster, States should establish a system for pre-
designation of International Humanitarian Organizations contingent upon a demonstrated
willingness and capacity to comply with Principle 2. This might be by means of a national
roster, bilateral agreements, acceptance of accreditation by a recognized humanitarian
accrediting body, acceptance of a roster of recommended organizations maintained by a
regional or international organization, or other appropriate means.
(b)
In the wake of a disaster, International Humanitarian Organizations not pre-
designated pursuant to Principle 8(2)(a) should be allowed to apply to Originating, Transit or
Affected States for designation for legal facilities with respect to that disaster contingent upon
a demonstrated willingness and capacity to comply with Principle 2.
Page 21 of 25
(c)
Procedures for application for pre-designation and designation should be as
simple and expeditious as possible. Ideally, they should be available without charge; in no
case should excessive fees be required. Information about the procedures should be clearly
stated and made freely available to International Humanitarian Organizations upon request.
Principle 9
Affected States may call upon Designated International Humanitarian Organizations to
provide reasonable information and reports on their activities, funding, and progress toward
stated goals. Retention of the designation in the concerned state to receive legal facilities
pursuant to Part V should be made dependent on ongoing compliance with such requirements
and the obligations in Principle 2. However, entitlement to legal facilities should not be
changed arbitrarily or retroactively or without notice appropriate to the circumstances.
Part V: Legal Facilities for Entry and Operations
The legal facilities in this Part are subject to the essential security, public health and
environmental health interests of Affected, Originating and Transit States. Exceptions to any
of these facilities designed to protect such interests should be clearly stated, tailored to the
exigencies of a disaster setting, and consistent with the imperative of addressing the needs of
affected persons for disaster relief and early recovery assistance.
Principle 10
Affected States should ensure that State-operated offices and services that are essential to the
timely delivery of international disaster relief function outside of normal business hours,
when necessary.
Principle 11
1. With regard to the relief and early recovery personnel of Assisting States and
Designated International Humanitarian Organizations, Affected States should:
(a)
Waive or promptly issue, without cost, multiple entry and exit visas and any
necessary work permits for the time necessary to carry out relief or early recovery tasks;
(b)
Recognize foreign university degrees, professional certificates, drivers licences
and other types of licenses necessary for the performance of their functions;
(c)
For non-nationals of the Affected State, waive income tax on salaries and
emoluments; and
(d)
Facilitate freedom of access to and freedom of movement in the disaster area.
2. Originating and Transit States should likewise waive or promptly issue, without cost,
exit or transit visas, as appropriate, for the disaster relief and early recovery personnel of
Designated International Humanitarian Organizations.
Principle 12
1. Affected States should ensure that Assisting States and Designated International
Humanitarian Organizations benefit as soon as possible upon entry from domestic legal
Page 22 of 25
personality, including the legal right to open bank accounts, enter into contracts and leases,
acquire and dispose of immovable and movable property and instigate legal proceedings.
2. Assisting States and Designated International Humanitarian Organizations should also
be granted the right to freely bring funds and currencies in or out of the country and to obtain
the most favourable legal rates of exchange in connection with disasterr or early recovery
activities.
3. Affected States should ensure that Assisting States and Designated International
Humanitarian Organizations may legally hire local personnel in accordance with domestic
labour laws.
Principle 13
1. With regard to the disaster relief and early recovery goods and equipment exported or
imported by, or on behalf of, Assisting States and Designated International Humanitarian
Organizations, Originating, Transit and Affected States should:
(a)
Exempt them from all customs duties, taxes, tariffs or charges;
(b)
Exempt them from all export, transit, and import restrictions
(c)
Simplify and minimize documentation requirements for export, transit and
import;
(d)
Permit re-exportation of any equipment or unused goods which the
international actor wishes to retain.
2. With regard to disaster relief goods and equipment only, Originating, Transit and
Affected States should additionally:
(a)
Waive or reduce inspection requirements. Where waiver is not possible, clear
Rrelief and recovery goods and equipment rapidly and as a matter of priority; and
(b)
Arrange for any necessary inspection and release outside business hours, or at
a place other than a customs office, as necessary to minimize delay.
3. In order to benefit from the facilities above, Assisting States and Designated
International Humanitarian Organizations should, in accordance with agreed international
standards, appropriately pack, classify and mark disaster relief and recovery goods and
equipment, and should include detailed manifests with each shipment in a language
understood in the Affected State. They should additionally inspect all such goods and
equipment to ensure their quality, appropriateness for the needs in the Affected State, and
compliance with national law.
Principle 14
1. In addition to the facilities described in Principle 13:
(a)
Affected States should grant temporary recognition to foreign registration and
plates with regard to vehicles imported by, or on behalf of, Assisting States and Designated
International Humanitarian Organizations.
Page 23 of 25
(b)
Affected States should waive or expedite the granting of any applicable
licenses and waive or reduce any other barriers to the use, import or export of
telecommunications and information technology equipment by, or on behalf of, Assisting
States and Designated International Humanitarian Organizations.
(c)
Affected States should grant Assisting States and Designated International
Humanitarian Organizations priority access (without discrimination against domestic Relief
actors) to bandwidth, frequencies and satellite use for telecommunications and data transfer
associated with disaster relief operations. Originating, Transit and Affected States should
waive or reduce legal and administrative barriers to exportation, transit, importation and re-
exportation of medications and medical equipment exported or imported by, or on behalf of,
Assisting States and Designated International Humanitarian Organizations, to the extent
consistent with public safety and international law. Assisting States and Designated
International Humanitarian Organizations should ensure the quality, appropriateness and
safety of any such medications and equipment, and in particular ensure that any medications
are:
(i)
Neither expired nor near expiration;
(ii)
Appropriately labelled in a language understood in the area of intended
use;
(iii)
Inspected, and transported and maintained in appropriate conditions, to
ensure their quality;
(iv)
Guarded against misappropriation and misuse.
Principle 15
1. Originating, Transit and Affected States should grant, without undue delay,
permission for the speedy passage of land, sea and air vehicles operated by or on behalf of an
Assisting State or Designated International Humanitarian Organization, for the purpose of
transporting disaster relief or early recovery assistance.
2. In particular, permission should be granted for overflight, landing and departure of
aircraft. Such aircraft should also be authorized to operate within the territory of the Affected
State as required for the delivery of assistance.
3. Any applicable exit, transit and entry visas for the operating personnel of such
transport vehicles should be promptly issued.
Principle 16
Affected States should provide exemptions or the equivalent to Assisting States and
Designated International Humanitarian Organizations from value-added and other taxes
associated with disaster relief operations, with the exception of reasonable usage fees.
Principle 17
Affected States shall take necessary measures to ensure the security and safety of all disaster
relief and early recovery personnel and of all premises, facilities
,
means of transport and
equipment used in connection with disaster relief or early recovery activities.
Page 24 of 25
Principle 18
1. An Assisting State deciding to employ military assets in disaster relief or early
recovery should ensure that they are used exceptionally as a tool to complement civilian relief
mechanisms where the latter are insufficient to address the needs of affected persons.
2. Military actors from Assisting States involved in disaster relief or early recovery
assistance should be unarmed and in national uniforms unless otherwise agreed with the
Affected State.
Principle 19
All States and Designated International Humanitarian Organizations should cooperate to
initiate appropriate proceedings with respect to acts involving unlawful diversion,
misappropriation, or fraud concerning disaster relief or early recovery goods, equipment or
resources.
Principle 20
The costs of providing international disaster relief or early recovery assistance pursuant to
these principles should normally be borne by the provider, with the following exceptions:
1.
Assisting States may agree in advance with the Affected State for the reimbursement
of certain costs and fees. Such agreement should be in writing, setting out: (1) the
assistance to be provided, (2) the amount of reimbursement and the means by which it
will be calculated, and (3) any other terms, conditions or restrictions applicable to
such reimbursement, including, but not limited to, the currency in which such payment
or reimbursement shall be made.
2.
Affected States should consider, to the extent possible under the circumstances,
providing certain free or reduced cost services to Assisting States and Designated
International Humanitarian Organizations, including:
a.
Personnel support;
b.
Transport services, on a priority basis, including on national airlines;
c.
Use of buildings and land for office and warehouse space; and
d.
Handling equipment and logistic support.
Principle 21
Affected States should hold harmless, defend and indemnify Assisting States from civil
liability for acts or speech related to disaster relief or early recovery operations in the territory
of the Affected State, with the exception of wilful misconduct and gross negligence.
Principle 22
The principles set out in this document are without prejudice to existing international law and
agreements, and in particular to:
1. International human rights and refugee law;
Page 25 of 25
2. The legal personality and status of States, inter-governmental organizations, and the
international components of the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement;
3. International law related to privileges and immunities; and
4. Other existing agreements between States or between States and international actors.