Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you to the committee for the invitation to the International Committee of the Red Cross to share our views and experiences in relation to the intersection of sanctions and humanitarian action.
The ICRC is part of the broader Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement, comprising the ICRC, the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, and national societies such as the Canadian Red Cross. Both the ICRC and the Canadian Red Cross provided written submissions to the committee for its study.
As mentioned before, I am joined today by my colleagues Austin Shangraw and Catherine Gribbin from the Canadian Red Cross. We appreciate the opportunity to appear today before the committee in representing the Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement.
As a neutral, independent and impartial humanitarian organization, the ICRC carries out humanitarian activities throughout the world to reach vulnerable populations affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence, including in contexts where sanctions apply.
Over the past years, the ICRC has noted an increase in sanctions and counterterrorism-related regulations in contexts where we operate. While we do not question the legitimacy of states and international organizations to employ such measures, we believe they must include safeguards to minimize any adverse impacts on the ability of impartial humanitarian organizations to respond to the needs of persons affected by armed conflict and other situations of violence, in accordance with humanitarian principles.
The ICRC has been engaging with states at the national, regional and multilateral level in an effort to ensure that sanctions are developed in line with their obligations under international humanitarian law and in a manner that does not impede principled humanitarian action. The ICRC believes that well-framed and standing humanitarian carve-outs for exclusively humanitarian activities undertaken by impartial humanitarian organizations in line with international law, including IHL, are the most appropriate way to comply with international law and facilitate humanitarian activities without undermining the objectives of sanctions regimes.
The adoption, at the end of last year, of the standing humanitarian carve-out across all UN sanctions regimes in United Nations Security Council Resolution 2664 demonstrates the acceptance of this approach for facilitating humanitarian activities. Since its adoption, the ICRC has been urging all states to fully implement UN Security Council Resolution 2664 and adopt appropriate domestic measures to give it full legal effect. The ICRC welcomes Canada's implementation a few months ago of the humanitarian carve-outs in Resolution 2664, along with the humanitarian carve-out in UN Security Council Resolution 2615 in the United Nations Act sanctions.
Sanctions can impact humanitarian organizations in various ways, often leading to operational delays or limitations on humanitarian activities. The ICRC has faced the following impacts from sanctions.
The first one is private sector de-risking and overcompliance. Humanitarian organizations rely upon private sector actors, such as suppliers and financial institutions, to carry out humanitarian activities. However, private sector actors have become increasingly hesitant to support humanitarian activities in certain contexts because of sanction risks, particularly in contexts where there are overlapping sanctions regimes. Even where there may be humanitarian carve-outs in sanctions in place, many private [Technical difficulty—Editor].
The second point is about the reduced number of suppliers. The ICRC has found that there is a decreasing number of suppliers willing to support humanitarian activities in contexts perceived to be a high sanctions risk. This de-risking from suppliers means that suppliers refuse to work in certain contexts.
The third point is that increased risks hinder impartial humanitarian action and funding. Impartial humanitarian organizations must engage with governmental entities and non-state armed groups to negotiate access and carry out their work providing aid based upon needs. When these entities are designated under sanctions, there are increased risks, whether legal, operational or duty of care to staff. Humanitarian personnel also risk possible prosecution for carrying out humanitarian activities. Relatedly, the increased risks may also restrict the ability of donors to fund impartial humanitarian organizations in certain contexts.
The ICRC has various recommendations to mitigate the impact of sanctions on humanitarian action and address the challenges I have highlighted. My colleagues and I look forward to discussing this in more detail in the Q and A. Humanitarian carve-outs are successful when there is clarity and certainty for humanitarian organizations, private sector actors, suppliers and banks and donors who want to support humanitarian action.
Thank you very much. We look forward to your questions.