{"id":4385,"date":"2019-04-30T04:26:21","date_gmt":"2019-04-30T08:26:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/charityandsecurity.org\/?p=4385"},"modified":"2019-10-24T07:10:58","modified_gmt":"2019-10-24T11:10:58","slug":"abstract-safeguarding-medical-care-and-humanitarian-action-in-the-un-counterterrorism-framework","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/charityandsecurity.org\/abstracts\/abstract-safeguarding-medical-care-and-humanitarian-action-in-the-un-counterterrorism-framework\/","title":{"rendered":"Abstract: Safeguarding Medical Care and Humanitarian Action in the UN Counterterrorism Framework"},"content":{"rendered":"
In her report\u00a0Safeguarding Medical Care and Humanitarian Action in the UN\u00a0Counterterrorism Framework<\/a><\/em><\/strong>, Alice Debarre poses the question of how UN and UN member state counterterrorism frameworks affect and interact with International Humanitarian Law (IHL). She does this through exploring what prevents IHL and counterterrorism frameworks from working together, specifically the principle of impartiality, which is significantly complicated by the lack of consensus on a definition for terrorism, terrorist act, or terrorist, and how designated terrorists should be treated under IHL. In this section she also references a status that has negatively impacted many an NGO: material support. Because medical personnel and aid groups are bound by medical ethics as well as IHL (specifically impartiality) under both UN and their host country\u2019s counterterrorism laws, delivering aid becomes ever more difficult and risky as more and more counterterrorism laws are applied.<\/p>\n