MSF protests lack of commitment to humanitarian law, pulls out of summit

A global medical charity group has pulled out of an upcoming humanitarian meeting in Turkey, to protest the lack of commitment by states to stick by humanitarian law.

On Wednesday, Doctors without Borders (MSF) said it will no longer take part in the Summit because the agenda to be discussed does not include issues affecting the work of relief workers in dangerous parts of the world.

“With regret, we have come to the decision to pull out of the summit. We no longer have any hope that the WHS (World Humanitarian Summit) will address the weaknesses in humanitarian action and emergency response, particularly in conflict areas or epidemic situations,” MSF said in a statement.

The World Humanitarian Summit is due to be held in Istanbul, Turkey from May 23 to 24, bringing world leaders from states, UN agencies and non-governmental organisations together “to stand up for our common humanity and take action to prevent and reduce human suffering”, according to a provisional programme posted on its website.

The meeting is meant to be a discussion forum between NGOs involved in relief aid and government leaders in the wake of conflicts in South Sudan, Central Africa Republic, Somalia, refugee crisis in the Mediterranean region and the rise Islamic State (IS) terror group.

According to the provisional programme, leaders are supposed to discuss ways of supporting long-term measures for communities affected by tragedies as well as localising relief aid.

But the charity group which runs medical relief services in more than 60 countries around the world says the agenda was ignoring one real fact on the ground: security for humanitarian workers and politics of response.

“As shocking violations of international humanitarian law and refugee rights continue on a daily basis, WHS participants will be pressed to a consensus on non-specific, good intentions to ‘uphold norms’ and ‘end needs’. The summit has become a fig-leaf of good intentions, allowing these systematic violations, by states above all, to be ignored.

“The summit neglects to reinforce the obligations of states to uphold and implement the humanitarian and refugee laws which they have signed up to,” MSF argued.

The Charity which originated in France won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1999 “in recognition of the organisation’s pioneering humanitarian work on several continents” in helping save lives in conflict-hit and disease outbreak areas.

MSF also says it faces challenges of its workers being killed in those areas as well as slow response from partners especially the UN.

When Ebola broke out in West Africa in 2014, MSF ran into constant feuds with the World Health Organisation (WHO) which took long to declare the outbreak an international health crisis.

In August 2013, MSF pulled out of Somalia, citing continual attacks on its staff working there, some of who it claimed had been killed.

In August last year and February this year, several of the organisation’s workers in South Sudan were killed and other wounded when fighting between rebels and government forces resumed in Malakal, north of the country.

In October last year, 42 civilians at an MSF-run hospital in Kunduz in Afghanistan were killed after a US army bomber plane shelled it. The organisation demanded an independent investigation, but the Pentagon last week said the pilots shelled the hospital accidentally and would not be prosecuted.

"But putting states on the same level as non-governmental organisations and UN agencies, which have no such powers or obligations, the Summit will minimise the responsibility of states. In addition, the non-binding nature of the commitments means that very few actors will sign up to any commitments they haven’t previously committed to.

“We hoped that the WHS would advance these vital access and protection issues, reinforcing the role for independent and impartial humanitarian aid, and putting particular attention on the need to improve emergency response.

“Unfortunately it has failed to do so, instead focusing on its ambitions to “do aid differently” and “end need”, fine-sounding words which threaten to dissolve humanitarian assistance into wider development, peace-building and political agendas.”