The Role of International Non-Governmental Organisation in the protection of human rights during Armed Conflicts

SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION

Human rights and armed conflict are words that often go together, like ‘Marks & Spencer’ or ‘chicken & chips’ as armed conflicts always brings into light human rights issues. Armed conflicts result in the abuse and violation of human rights, which should be protected during conflict. The UN and other organisations have come out with rules and regulations that belligerents should adhere to but these laws are often disregarded resulting in massive human rights violations. All four treaties of the 1949 Geneva Convention and its 1977 Additional Protocols talk about the treatment and protection of non-combatants, which include; civilians, prisoners of war, the wounded and sick, members of shipwrecked and others (Okumu, 2003: 121).

Civilians, often women and children are those who mostly have their rights trampled upon and suffer enormous humiliation at the hands of combatants and as argued by Okumu (2003: 122) and Aall et al (2000:106), civilians have now become the object of attack in armed conflicts. Cases of rape and other sexual violations are common atrocities carried out by combatants as well as the involvement of children as child soldiers. Reference can be made to the 1994 Rwanda genocide, 1989/90 Liberia conflict, 1991 Sierra Leone civil war, Kosovo and Bosnia just to mention but a few where all kinds of inhumane treatments were meted on non-combatants. Governments who are supposed to protect the rights of the population under their jurisdiction at times turn to be the violators of rights; Sudan, Iraq under Saddam Hussein.

The above situation calls for the intervention by another body to take up this task or help during armed conflicts; INGOs and NGOs have taken it upon themselves to carry out such task. They have gained much credibility in the eyes of many western countries who now prefer to deal with conflicts and development especially in the third world through these organisations; they have increased much in the last 2 decades (Reimann, 2005:37; Okumu, 2003:120; Aall et al 2000:90-91; Wiseberg, 2003:347-48). This essay discusses the role of INGOs and NGOs in the protection of human rights; thus the role of human rights INGOs and NGOs in armed conflict. In answering the question the roles of these organisations have been discussed and analysed side by side with some criticisms and problems levelled against them by various scholars, governments and other entities. A conclusion is then made following the discussions.

DEFINITIONS OF INGOs AND NGOs

The UN definition of INGOs and NGOs as defined in Ahmed and Potter (2006:8) is “any international organisation which is not established by inter-governmental agreement”. This definition does not give a broader sense of what these organisations are but has been clarified by Ahmed and Potter (ibid) to exclude profit-making, violence use advocacy groups, schools or political parties. Thus nationalist and terrorist groups cannot be classified as INGOs or NGOs.

Aall et al (2000:89) give a broader definition of what INGOs and NGOs are:

“A private, self-governing, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to alleviating human suffering; and/or promoting education, health care, economic development, environmental protection, human rights, and conflict resolution; and/or encouraging the establishment of democratic institutions and civil society”.

NGOs to them are there to provide service to and protect sectors in the society that are underserved or seemed underserved by governments and other official institutions like the UN. Based on their activities INGOs and NGOs have being categorised into four by Aall et al (2000:94); humanitarian assistance, human rights, civil-society & democracy building and conflict resolution but some of them perform more than one of these activities. They argue that INGOs and NGOs involved in armed conflicts have the sole objective of relieving human suffering regardless of political, ethnic, religious or other affiliations. This essay is concerned with human rights INGOs and NGOs.

Human Rights INGOs and NGOs

Ahmed and Potter (2006:184 ) defines human rights NGOs as “advocacy organisations whose goals are to monitor and report human rights violations, exert pressure on governments to promote human rights, hold them accountable, and build pressure to create international machinery to end human rights violations”.

These organisations have also complemented and supplemented official development assistance and acts as watchdogs and critics.

Armed conflict as stated above results in many brutalities, abuses and violations and Aall et al (2000:105) argued, INGOs and NGOs (hereafter ‘(I)NGOs’) involved in armed conflicts have the sole objective of relieving human suffering regardless of political, ethnic, religious or other affiliation. Food, water, shelter and other basic necessities become scarce due to the chaotic environment that pertains during conflict and there are also various threats to life and human rights. Access to these things becomes very difficult but through the activities of these organisations the unreachable places become reachable as they are mostly able to meet the needs of the suffering population. Various (I)NGOs have mushroomed today and have been working earnestly at local, regional, national and international levels in the promotion of human rights during armed conflicts. The most widely known ones include; Amnesty International (AI), Human Rights Watch (HRW), Oxfam and the International League for Human Rights.

ROLES OF INGOs AND NGOs IN INTERNAL ARMED CONFLICTS

Some roles of INGOs and NGOs are discussed and analysed in the below discussions. It also takes into account the criticisms and problems associated with these roles.

Fact finding or information-gathering

During armed conflict these organisations in their quest to protect human rights play fact-finding or Information-gathering, analysis and dissemination role (Wiseberg, 2003:354; Ahmed and Potter, 2000:185; Breen 2003:455). This is an important role assumed by (I)NGOs and through their operations covert activities regarding human rights in conflict are made overt. It brings to light the gruesome things meted on humanity and calls for the involvement of IGOs concerned with human rights to intervene to safeguard the situation referring to international humanitarian laws prohibiting violation of rights. Mostly these states involved in the conflict are parties to important international human rights laws and convention and as such should obey the laws concerning rights of human during these times; but it turns to be the other way round whereby these rights are violated. United Nations in their effort to investigate the allegation of human rights abuse in Eastern Zaire (D.R Congo) in the Hutu refugee camps was denied entry by President Laurent Kabila through numerous reasons in 1996. HRW (1997) detailed all the human rights violations by Kabila calling for action to be taken by UN and this gave the needed information to the UN joint mission, which was to investigate but was denied entry into Zaire. This fact-finding or information-gathering is salient since it serves as spur for discourse and this in turn offer the thrust for change at the national or international level. What seems to be secret human rights abuses in armed conflicts are now made public through this role played by these NGOs during conflict. Durham (2004:171) noticed this when he argued that states now cannot hold on to vital information on human rights during armed conflict as they did prior to the active involvement of NGOs in conflict. Also Graham Blewitt, the Deputy Prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal in former Yugoslavia (ICTY) noticed the importance of this role to the prevention of human rights violation:

“NGOs, which focus on human rights, by their nature, are well equipped to assist the Tribunals in their investigation work. I say this because human rights organisations focus on the monitoring and reporting of human rights violations and seek to prevent future violations…”(Blewitt, 1996; cited in Durham, 2004:173).

Through this role they were able in 1990 to bring the attention of the international media to the breaches of International Humanitarian Laws in the Balkans especially rapes in former Yugoslavia (ibid: 172-73). In so doing the international community becomes aware of the plight of civilians and other non-combatants in the conflict and most often put pressure on the government or warring factions to respect human rights. The information from these organisations is made available through reports, magazines, newsletters and websites and they are able to get into areas where intergovernmental organisations are denied access to gain information (Schloms, 2003:40).

For humanitarian intervention to be justified in an armed conflict there should be evidence of massive human rights abuse and the intervention should be backed by proper authority – mostly UN. The information gathered by (I)NGOs on the violations of rights during conflict in a particular country could be used as evidence of massive human rights abuses, which in turn can be used as a justification for humanitarian intervention to protect human rights. Based on these information pressure can be mounted on IGOs such as the UN through lobby to warranty humanitarian intervention to prevent infringement of rights. The human rights violations and violations of the laws of war in the on-going conflict between the government forces of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have been exposed through the role of NGOs like HRW and AI despite restriction on the flow of information by the government. A HRW (2009) report has detailed the various abuses and violations by both the government forces and the LTTE which include shelling of densely populated areas and use of civilians as human shield respectively. This has served as evidence, which in a way can be argued to be behind the increasing pressure on both sides to halt these violations.

Criticism of the Fact-finding and Information Mobilisation Role

Questions of neutrality and impartiality regarding the fact-finding and mobilisation of information are raised since at times information may be bias and lack facts and this may cause serious problem especially when workers for these organisations perform unprofessional work. The question here is how truthful are the facts that have been gathered by these organisations? Are they collected to just tarnish the image of belligerents or to inform the outside world about the human rights breaches in an armed conflict? Their information may be fraught with misleading facts which may not represent the actual state of things in the armed conflict with regards to human rights. Though they may have the right source for their information but as argued by Aall et al (2000:106) “they lack the sophisticated intelligence capacities of the military or of state governments.” Despite this criticism this role cannot be undermined as it has helped in protecting human right abuses.

Witnessing, Denunciation or Mobilisation of Shame

Secondly, through witnessing, denunciation or the mobilisation of shame, (I)NGOs protect human rights during armed conflicts (Wiseberg, 2003:358). This has been one major role played by (I)NGOs which is aimed at bringing shame to the perpetrators of gross human rights breaches in times of conflict. They pursue this through press releases and the mounting of press campaigns, publishing reports which are widely disseminated mostly to policy-makers. Denunciations are also carried out through films and videos, popular music or theatre and testimonies before governmental and intergovernmental bodies.

In employing these tactics, these organisations hope to amass some ends, which include shaming governments or human rights violators to halt their abuses. The infringements of rights are exposed to public glare. This action can result in the generation of international opposition, which may lead to pressure and even sanctions landed against abusing governments. This tactics was employed in June 1993 during the World Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna. Governmental human rights violations were uncovered and denounced by the NGO Forum through posters and pictures depicting torture scenes, faces of the disappeared and the agonies faced by people in armed conflict (ibid:359). It is not only governments who have their human rights violations exposed through this kind of role played by these organisations but also the general human rights conditions during armed conflicts are also exposed. This kind of mechanism may prompt awareness of on-going human rights situation in a conflict state and call for actions to be taken to salvage the situation. Emphasis is put on this method by (I)NGOs since government in their ‘good minds’ may not want their image to be tarnish by being labelled violators of rights and as such may act.

Belligerents engage in various means to defend themselves when their human rights issues are raised through this tactic used by (I)NGOs. They embark on offensive tactics to counter the denunciation tools used by these organisations. They do this through blatant denial of facts, classifying the organisation as subversive or terrorist group or nationalistic, hiring of high-powered public relations who give them good image (Wiseberg, 2003:358). In so doing belligerents may be able to cover up their abuses if this offensive mechanism is properly used especially when they also create government-organised non-governmental organisations (GONGOs).

Charity and Relief

Another crucial role of (I)NGOs during armed conflict is charity and relief directed towards victims of the conflict who often are denied their rights.

Ahmed and Potter (2006:38-39) argue that most (I)NGOs like the Red Cross, Oxfam and CARE grew out of war and consider relief assistance as very detrimental in their work. The importance of this role was awarded by the giving of the 1999 Nobel Peace Prize to MSF (ibid). Internal armed conflicts lead to the creation of refugees and internally displaced people (IDPs) who need to be catered for in terms of shelter, food, health and other social and economic livelihoods. According to UNHRC (1999; cited in Aall et al 2000:122) report, as of 1999 approximately, 40 to 50 million people had been rendered homeless by armed conflict; out of which 20 million were refugees as a result of persecution and conflict. The remaining 20 to 30 million people were IDPs. The plights of these people are met by (I)NGOs who provide relief assistance. Relief assistance may be short term operation aimed at saving civilian lives but (I)NGOs also embark on long term operations aimed at development after conflict (ibid:123: Ahmed and Potter, 2006:185-86). Organisations such as Medecins Sans Frontieres, Oxfam, ICRC and others have involved themselves in the protection of human rights through the provision of relief assistance. ICRC in February, 2009 involved itself intensively in the provision of food, water, accommodation and medical care to the victims of the conflict between the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE. More than 4000 sick and wounded person were evacuated to safety zones to receive care by the organisation (ICRC, 2009).

Criticism of Relief and Charity Role

Relief, charity and development assistance are important but may at times cause problems and even escalate the conflict. A case in point is the accusation levelled against (I)NGOs in the early and mid 1990s for their involvement in the escalation of the conflicts in Somalia and Rwanda (Reimann, 2005: 40: Aall et al, 2000: 107; Okumu, 2003:122-27). NGOs who provided food and other relief items to groups (civilians) affected by the conflict were accused of prolonging the conflict through their assistance. In a conflict whereby different actors are involved it becomes difficult to identify which group needs relief assistance. This is because the provision of assistance to one group may be seen as aiding that group at the expense of other victims of the conflict. Thus the relief from these organisations can land in the wrong hands.

According to Reimann (2005:40), NGOs engaged in the role of relief assistance may be seen as potential aiders of conflict through five ways; provision of resources to warring factions, freeing up internal resources for use in conflict, contributing to market distortions, legitimising of belligerents and reinforcing societal divisions and conflict. New resources are made available from the outside world and these resources may be manipulated by antagonist factions in the conflict to fuel the conflict. Belligerents get access to NGOs relief materials through stealing, making agreement with NGOs to give them access to places affected by the war (Okumu, 2003:126-27). Several NGOs that were operating in Somalia and Sudan found out that more than 80% of their food supplies had lost through theft and manipulation (Abiew, 2003:25).

PROBLEMS FACED IN ROLE PERFORMANCE

In performing their roles in armed conflict staff of these organisations faces many life threatening issues ranging from injuries, hostage, and even death. They put their lives at risk especially in states where there is no effective government or has collapsed. A consortium led by Norwegian Church Aid lost eight of its staff in southern Sudan in January 2000 (Aall et al, 2000:108). The kind of cars, gadgets, and other amenities used by these organisations may be far better than those used by the belligerents and this attracts them to attack these (I)NGOs. We should not forget that these instruments or machines used by (I)NGOs give them access to places that cannot be reached especially rough roads.

CONCLUSION

From the above discussion three important roles assumed by INGOs and NGOs have been analysed and through this discussion it may be seen that these organisations involvement in armed conflict is worthwhile and should be encouraged. Notwithstanding these phenomenal roles by these organisations which are deemed at protecting human rights during conflict, they may also be responsible for the prolongation of a conflict through their relief assistance. Care should be taken by these entities in protecting human rights during armed conflict in order not to worsen the already turbulent environment where the rights of people are being trampled upon.

Information gathered by them should be properly examined and analysed in order to come out with authentic information directed towards protection of human sufferings but not just to announce their presence to the world. In so doing the criticisms that come their way may be reduced and their fact-finding role will be trustworthy in both governmental and public arena.

Lastly (I)NGOs should have adequate security in their administration of relief assistance as this

is one of the areas where combatants take advantage and exploit to achieve their selfish

ambition of using relief materials to prolong war. As noted at times relief assistance land in the

wrong hands that use them to manipulate the conflict by starving those who need these aid.