>> Having examined the right to humanitarian assistance in situations of armed conflict, we now turn our attention to situations of natural disaster. Does the right to humanitarian assistance differ in situations of armed conflict and natural disaster. In the absence of a multilateral treaty, similar to that of the Geneva conventions, other soft law instruments have emerged. Which appear to suggest a recognition of a right to humanitarian assistance, in situations of natural disasters, to the extent that is part of customary law. Please watch the video and listen to Professor Kapila's opinion on the changing norms and expectations concerning the existence of a right to humanitarian assistance in customary law. >> Is there a right to humanitarian assistance? I don't think there is. Legally speaking there isn't a right to humanitarian assistance. But over time, society has grown certain norms and expectations. And the founder of MSF, Bernard Kouchner for example, who coined the phrase [FOREIGN], the right to help, has had a seminal influence on changing attitudes. So that today the right to receive humanitarian assistance is almost recognized like customary law around the world. In fact, in the statutes of the international criminal code, obstruction for the provision of humanitarian assistance, civilian population in need is a crime and punishable under the statutes. So, what this illustrates for us is that humanitarian norms and expectations are not static, they grow as society changes. >> Professor Kapila, recognizes, that even though it is questionable as to whether there is a legal right to humanitarian assistance. Society has developed certain norms and expectations to the extent that a right to humanitarian assistance is recognized by international customary law. A soft law instrument that has aided in the formation of international customary law on the right to humanitarian assistance is that of the Sphere Handbook. The handbook puts forward a humanitarian charter and a set of minimum standards in humanitarian response. The charter is an internationally excepted code of principles and standards concerning humanitarian response in situations of conflict and natural disaster. And it states that there is a right to receive humanitarian assistance. The charter clearly states that in terms of core principles, rights and duties, the right to receive assistance sits firmly alongside the right to live life with dignity and the right to protection and, and security. Both of these rights are well established and supported by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. [BLANK_AUDIO] The right to receive humanitarian assistance is a necessary element of the right to life with dignity. This encompasses the right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, water, clothing, shelter and requirements for good health, which are expressly guaranteed in international law. Where the state or non-state actors are not providing such assistance themselves, we believe they must allow others to help to do so. In times of natural disaster, the International Federation of the Red Cross have established a soft law instrument called the International disaster response. Laws, rule and principles or the IDRL. The IDRL puts forward a number of guidelines in improving the national and international humanitarian response in times of natural disaster. The guidelines are a set of recommendations to governments on how to prepare their disaster laws and plans for the common regulatory problems in international disaster relief operations. They advise them as the minimal quality standards they should insist upon in humanitarian assistance as well as the kinds of legal facilities aid providers need to do their work effectively. In 2007 these guidelines were unanimously adopted by various states in Red Cross and Red Crescent Act's. However it is important to know that both these soft law instruments are non binding. In other words, states are under no obligation to adhere to the various guidelines and minimum standards with regards to providing humanitarian assistance. The non binding aspect of these charters brings us onto a dilemma identified earlier by Professor Broman. The rejection of humanitarian assistance by national governments. In times of international and internal armed conflicts, a state's refusal to accept humanitarian assistance is considered illegitimate when such denial leads to war crimes. For example, article 54 with the first additional protocol, and article 14 of the second additional protocol both clearly state that starvation of civilian as a method of combat is prohibited. These provisions are strengthened further in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which codifies starvation as a prohibited form of warfare, and a war crime. However, in situations of natural disaster, there is no international recognized treaty that stipulates whether or not a state's refusal to accept humanitarian assistance is legitimate. This problem is illustrated in the case of Cyclone Nargis which ripped through Burma in May 2008. In only two days, the cyclone swept across the south of the country with disastrous humanitarian consequences. Up to 54,000 people went missing. U.N. estimates a total of 2.4 million people were affected. Offers of humanitarian assistance poured in from the international community. The Burmese military government did accept aid, but refused to allow foreign aid workers into the country to coordinate its delivery to those in need. The Burmese military government were adamant that they were capable of distributing the aid effectively to those in need. This led to the delay in distributing the aid to those in need. The examples of states refusing or even blocking humanitarian assistance, reflects why the issues of sovereignty.