Humanitarian aid

Humanitarian assistance in armed conflict has its own specific legal aspects, including access to humanitarian assistance and the protection of humanitarian workers. The main legal norms that regulate humanitarian aid include: international humanitarian law (IHL); relevance of humanitarian dialogue; protection of humanitarian workers.

IHL sets out the rules governing the protection of persons not participating in armed conflicts, such as civilians and internally displaced persons. It ensures the protection of the civilian population, their rights and humanitarian aid, in particular by ensuring unimpeded access to humanitarian aid and providing protection to humanitarian workers. In general, in the international practice of conducting humanitarian operations, basic directions of action are distinguished, the degree of importance and priority of which varies by hierarchy and scale: search and rescue; providing asylum; provision of food; drinking water supply; medical and social security; protection from violence and intimidation.

Particularly important is humanitarian assistance from impartial humanitarian organizations, aimed at reducing the vulnerability of vital objects and meeting the needs of the population affected by the armed conflict. The practical effectiveness of humanitarian action depends on the possibility of immediate and unhindered access to those in need, however, there are some fundamental legal constraints. First of all, collective assistance in accordance with Article 70, Clause 1 of Additional Protocol I should be provided only by agreement between conflicting parties interested in conducting such operations. Adherence to humanitarian dialogue requires all warring parties to provide unhindered access to humanitarian aid for those in need. This means that warring parties must allow unhindered access to humanitarian organizations, aid providers and humanitarian workers to provide the necessary assistance.

At the same time, humanitarian activities must be conducted with the agreement of all interested parties (Geneva Conventions, general articles 9, 10). Thus, the resolution 46/182 of the UN General Assembly (principle 3), dedicated to strengthening the coordination of emergency aid, indicates the need for such agreement even for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), whose mandate is to make an official request for help. However, unfortunately, as evidenced, in particular, by the events of the Russian-Ukrainian war, this is not always enough to overcome the disregard of the norms of international humanitarian law by the Russian side, which considers itself the bearer of the truth of the last instance and does not care about the fate of the victims.

Studying and analyzing the mass media covering the war in Ukraine, it can be unequivocally stated that the reasons for the problems with humanitarian access arise entirely because of Russia's armed aggression. After all, constant shelling and the inability to reach the territories that need humanitarian aid cause humanitarian disasters that take many lives of the civilian population, and the solution to these problems from the right's point of view, unfortunately, is ineffective.

Humanitarian workers engaged in the provision of humanitarian aid have the right to protection from any form of violence or hostile treatment. International norms, such as the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols, provide this protection and provide rules for behavior in conflict situations. It is important to emphasize that according to the norms of international humanitarian law, it is only possible to temporarily restrict the movement of employees who provide humanitarian aid in a situation where humanitarian aid operations have already been approved, and the offer to provide services can be rejected if they there is no need, or when the activity offered as part of the services is not humanitarian in nature, or if the offer comes from an organization that is not objective or humanitarian. There are no other grounds that would justify the refusal to grant consent to conduct operations for the provision of humanitarian aid as such. However, unfortunately, we, defending our territory, are dealing with an uncivilized state in every sense. So, for example, the explosion of the Kakhovskaya HPP dam, which caused an environmental and humanitarian disaster in Ukraine on a global scale, also exacerbated the problem of lack of access to victims in the occupied territories. Russia rejected the UN's request for access to the territories flooded due to the breach of the Kakhov dam.

The United Nations (UN) and international humanitarian organizations such as the Red Cross also play an important role in ensuring access to humanitarian aid and the protection of aid workers. They work with warring parties, local authorities and other stakeholders to ensure unimpeded access to needed resources and to protect aid workers. The scope of services offered by an impartial humanitarian organization should be interpreted as including humanitarian activities as a whole. It obviously includes both the provision of assistance and the provision of protection. Thus, humanitarian action seeks to protect people's lives and ensure their safety or restore and support the mental and physical well-being of those affected by armed conflict. Separately, it is worth noting the problems of sexual violence associated with armed conflicts, which is especially relevant for Ukraine today, because mass cases of sexual violence against the civilian population on the territory by Russian military personnel are recorded. Moreover, humanitarian activities should be carried out for the benefit of all persons who may need assistance and/or protection in connection with the armed conflict. This means that states cannot limit humanitarian activities to the civilian population alone. Such activities can also be carried out for the benefit of wounded and sick soldiers, prisoners of war, persons who were deprived of their liberty for other reasons in connection with the armed conflict, etc. However, unfortunately, humanitarian organizations, in particular the Red Cross, discredit themselves by not fulfilling their mediation functions and even helping to commit humanitarian crimes such as child abduction or equating the actions of the aggressor country Russia with the actions of a country that defends its territory, Ukraine. Such actions undermine trust in humanitarian organizations both in Ukraine and around the world.

It should also not be forgotten that the obligation to provide operations for the provision of humanitarian aid and to facilitate their implementation may apply not only to the parties to the armed conflict, but also to other subjects. This means that a state that is not a party to the conflict, but through its territory an impartial humanitarian organization needs to transit in order to be in the conflict zone - must authorize it.

The proposal, first of all, by domestic scientists in the field of international humanitarian law, to add to the Statute of the International Criminal Court and to provide for criminal liability for the refusal of humanitarian access by the occupying power, if the population is in dire need of help, and life and health are at risk due to the actions of the occupiers, is valid. The norms for the provision of humanitarian assistance need to be codified in the form of the adoption of a convention, in which it is necessary to provide rules for humanitarian access to the occupied regions. It would be expedient to adopt the Fifth Geneva Convention and its protocol on the provision of humanitarian assistance, as well as the convention on humanitarian assistance to victims of natural or man-made emergencies and its protocol. It is also time to introduce innovative approaches to the provision of humanitarian aid, which would prove their effectiveness and be constantly improved taking into account new world realities.

As a result of the many terrible examples of violations of international humanitarian law that we have observed since February 2022, questions about responsibility for violations have become, in them - both unreasonable expectations and skepticism. In other words, there is an urgent need to understand the need for punishment for war crimes and the mechanism of responsibility for violations of international humanitarian law.