A / A / A

publications

Rights and Justice

Practices and critiques of international humanitarian law

The development of contemporary humanitarian action has historically been associated with international humanitarian law. Viewed as a framework and scope for humanitarian action by certain players and as ambiguous (necro)ethics to be used as a political resource whenever necessary by others, humanitarian law has played a pivotal role in various controversies roiling MSF and the aid community. The studies contained in this volume explore these controversies, delving into the relationships between humanitarian organisations, international criminal justice, the right to intervene, the law-making process and the various ways the law is used.

Types
Un groupe de 150 Syriens traverse la frontière entre la Grèce et la Macédoine.
Tribune

Consultations on asylum and immigration bill: MSF denounces ‘‘a fool’s game”

Abstaining from participation in a meeting taking place this coming Thursday, MSF feels that "government officials have listened politely at best and shown condescension and contempt at worst in response to positions expressed in meetings, op-ed pieces published in the press and questions asked in meetings by NGOs" and do not hide "a policy that is sliding into harsh repression".

Un signe d'interdiction des armes est collé sur la fenêtre d'une voiture
Article

Criminalising the enemy and its impact on humanitarian action

Could a doctor working for a humanitarian organisation be sentenced to life imprisonment in the United States for having offered his “expert advice” to people linked to a “terrorist organisation”? That is what is feared by a number of civil rights’ organisations in the US since the Supreme Court declared on 21 June that the legislation known as the Material Support Statute was constitutional. 

A tank moves towards the frontlines as people are fleeing
Article

"Not in our name": Why Medecins sans frontières does not support the "responsability of protect"

Argued in the 1990s in the name of the "right or duty to intervene", the application of military might to rescue populations in danger is now debated with reference to the "Responsibility to Protect" paradigm (or "R2P" for those in the know). In this article Fabrice Weissman explains why MSF refuses to adhere to this doctrine of ‘just war', whose legalisation would effectively be legalising a new form of imperialism.