Practice Relating to Rule 55. Access for Humanitarian Relief to Civilians in Need

Note: For practice concerning the safety and protection from attack of humanitarian relief personnel and objects used for humanitarian relief operations, see Rules 31 and 32 respectively. For practice concerning the freedom of movement of humanitarian relief personnel, see Rule 56.
ICC Statute
Pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the 1998 ICC Statute, “[i]ntentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts. 
Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted by the UN Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Rome, 17 July 1998, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9, Article 8(2)(b)(xxv).
Kampala Convention
Article 7(5)(g) of the 2009 Kampala Convention provides that members of armed groups, defined as “dissident armed forces or other organized armed groups that are distinct from the armed forces of the state” are prohibited from “impeding humanitarian assistance and passage of all relief consignments, equipment and personnel to internally displaced persons”. 
African Union Convention for the Protection and Assistance of Internally Displaced Persons in Africa, adopted in Kampala, Uganda, 23 October 2009, Article 7(5)(g).
Agreement No. 3 between the Parties to the Conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the ICRC Plan of Action
Paragraph I of the 1992 Agreement No. 3 between the Parties to the Conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the ICRC Plan of Action considered that “failure to give the ICRC access to certain areas where humanitarian needs have been identified and to besieged towns” was an illustration of the insecurity reigning in this country. 
Agreement No. 3 between Representatives of Mr. Alija Izetbegović (President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and President of the Party of Democratic Action), Representative of Mr. Radovan Karadžić (President of the Serbian Democratic Party), and Representative of Mr. Miljenko Brkić (President of the Croatian Democratic Community) on the ICRC Plan of Action, Geneva, 6 June 1992, § I.
UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15
The UNTAET Regulation No. 2000/15 establishes panels with exclusive jurisdiction over serious criminal offences, including war crimes. According to Section 6(1)(b)(xxv), “[i]ntentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions” constitutes a war crime in international armed conflicts. 
Regulation on the Establishment of Panels with Exclusive Jurisdiction over Serious Criminal Offences, UN Doc. UNTAET/REG/2000/15, Dili, 6 June 2000, Section 6(1)(b)(xxv).
Germany
Germany’s Military Manual (1992) states that, in the case of a blockade, “it is … prohibited to hinder relief shipments for the civilian population”. 
Germany, Humanitarian Law in Armed Conflicts – Manual, DSK VV207320067, edited by The Federal Ministry of Defence of the Federal Republic of Germany, VR II 3, August 1992, English translation of ZDv 15/2, Humanitäres Völkerrecht in bewaffneten Konflikten – Handbuch, August 1992, § 1051.
Netherlands
The Military Manual (2005) of the Netherlands states: “Only in the case of imperative military necessity may the activities of the relief personnel be limited.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 0820.
In its chapter on non-international armed conflict, the manual states: “It is expressly prohibited to wilfully deny access to necessary and available food, drinking water, medicines or medical treatment.” 
Netherlands, Humanitair Oorlogsrecht: Handleiding, Voorschift No. 27-412, Koninklijke Landmacht, Militair Juridische Dienst, 2005, § 1052.
Philippines
The Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (2006) provides:
During combat operation:
13. Do not block the entry of food, health services and education to the civilian populace as a way to defeat the enemy. If you plan to neutralize the enemy through this method, the civilian population will surely be affected. However, “government forces may prevent or limit the entry of service workers (eg. DSWD [Department of Social Welfare and Development] personnel) and the delivery of goods into an area of armed conflict if the same will interfere directly with ongoing combat operations, or will endanger the lives or safety of service workers or those delivering the goods. Any dispute arising from the restriction of the flow of goods and services shall be resolved by the Peace and Order Council concerned.” 
Philippines, Philippine Army Soldier’s Handbook on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, A Practical Guide for Internal Security Operations, 2006, p. 58, § 13.
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Basic Military Manual (1987) states: “It is prohibited to starve the civilian population … by impeding relief actions in favour of the population in need.” 
Switzerland, Lois et coutumes de la guerre (Extrait et commentaire), Règlement 51.7/II f, Armée Suisse, 1987, Article 147(b).
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Regulation on Legal Bases for Conduct during an Engagement (2005) states: “Personnel of national and international Red Cross and Red Crescent organizations are protected. They must be able to perform their duties without interference.” 
Switzerland, Bases légales du comportement à l’engagement (BCE), Règlement 51.007/IVf, Swiss Army, issued based on Article 10 of the Ordinance on the Organization of the Federal Department for Defence, Civil Protection and Sports of 7 March 2003, entry into force on 1 July 2005, § 181.
Ukraine
Ukraine’s IHL Manual (2004) states: “Serious violations of international humanitarian law directed against people include: … limitation of access of the population to food and water”. 
Ukraine, Manual on the Application of IHL Rules, Ministry of Defence, 11 September 2004, § 1.8.5.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Military Manual (1958) provides:
The Occupant must not in any way whatsoever divert relief consignments from their intended purpose except in cases of urgent necessity and then only in the interest of the population of the occupied territory as a whole and with the consent of the Protecting Power … The Occupant must facilitate the rapid distribution of these consignments. 
United Kingdom, The Law of War on Land being Part III of the Manual of Military Law, The War Office, HMSO, 1958, § 541.
Australia
Australia’s ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act (2002) incorporates in the Criminal Code the war crimes defined in the 1998 ICC Statute, including “the wilful impeding of relief supplies for civilians” in international armed conflicts. 
Australia, ICC (Consequential Amendments) Act, 2002, Schedule 1, § 268.67(1)(a)(ii).
Bangladesh
Bangladesh’s International Crimes (Tribunal) Act (1973) states that the “violation of any humanitarian rules applicable in armed conflicts laid down in the Geneva Conventions of 1949” is a crime. 
Bangladesh, International Crimes (Tribunal) Act, 1973, Section 3(2)(e).
Belgium
Belgium’s Penal Code (1867), as amended in 2003, provides:
War crimes envisaged in the 1949 [Geneva] Conventions … and in the [1977 Additional Protocols I and II] … , as well as in Article 8(2)(f) of the [1998 ICC Statute], and listed below, … constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title … :
10. intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including by wilfully impeding relief supplies as envisaged in the [1949] Geneva Conventions. 
Belgium, Penal Code, 1867, as amended on 5 August 2003, Chapter III, Title I bis, Article 136 quater, § 1(10).
Belgium
Belgium’s Law relating to the Repression of Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law (1993), as amended in 2003, provides:
War crimes envisaged in the 1949 [Geneva] Conventions … and in the [1977 Additional Protocols I and II] … , as well as in Article 8(2)(f) of the [1998 ICC Statute], and listed below, … constitute crimes under international law and shall be punished in accordance with the provisions of the present title … :
6 bis intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including by wilfully impeding relief supplies as envisaged in the [1949] Geneva Conventions. 
Belgium, Law relating to the Repression of Grave Breaches of International Humanitarian Law, 1993, as amended on 23 April 2003, Article 1 ter, § 1(6 bis).
Burundi
Burundi’s Law on Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (2003) states:
[The following are] considered as war crimes:
B. Other serious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflicts, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
x) intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions. 
Burundi, Law on Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, 2003, Article 4(B)(x).
Burundi
Burundi’s Penal Code (2009) states:
“War crimes” means crimes which are committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large-scale commission of such crimes, in particular:
2. … [S]erious violations of the laws and customs applicable in international armed conflict, within the established framework of international law, namely, any of the following acts:
26°. Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the [1949] Geneva Conventions. 
Burundi, Penal Code, 2009, Article 198(2)(26°).
Canada
Canada’s Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act (2000) provides that the war crimes defined in Article 8(2) of the 1998 ICC Statute are “crimes according to customary international law” and, as such, indictable offences under the Act. 
Canada, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes Act, 2000, Section 4(1) and (4).
Colombia
Colombia’s Penal Code (2000) imposes a criminal sanction on “anyone who, during an armed conflict, obstructs or impedes … the realization of medical and humanitarian tasks which, according to the rules of international humanitarian law, can and must take place”. 
Colombia, Penal Code, 2000, Article 153.
Congo
The Congo’s Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act (1998) defines war crimes with reference to the categories of crimes defined in Article 8 of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
Congo, Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity Act, 1998, Article 4.
Denmark
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (1973), as amended in 1978, provides:
Any person who uses war instruments or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or the general rules of international law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. a fine, lenient imprisonment or up to 12 years’ imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 1973, as amended in 1978, § 25(1).
Denmark’s Military Criminal Code (2005) provides:
Any person who deliberately uses war means [“krigsmiddel”] or procedures the application of which violates an international agreement entered into by Denmark or international customary law, shall be liable to the same penalty [i.e. imprisonment up to life imprisonment]. 
Denmark, Military Criminal Code, 2005, § 36(2).
Finland
Finland’s Criminal Code (1889), as amended in 2008, provides that any person who “prevents civilians from receiving foodstuffs or other supplies necessary for survival or emergency assistance or uses other means of warfare prohibited in international law” shall be “sentenced for a war crime to imprisonment for at least one year or for life”. 
Finland, Criminal Code, 1889, as amended in 2008, Chapter 11, Section 5(1)(13).
(emphasis in original)
France
France’s Penal Code (1992), as amended in 2010, states in its section on war crimes related to international armed conflict:
Using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable for their survival, including intentionally impeding relief supplies as provided for under the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their 1977 Additional Protocols is punishable by life imprisonment. 
France, Penal Code, 1992, as amended in 2010, Article 461-25.
Georgia
Under Georgia’s Criminal Code (1999), any war crime provided for by the 1998 ICC Statute, which is not explicitly mentioned in the Code, is a crime, including “intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions” in international armed conflicts. 
Georgia, Criminal Code, 1999, Article 413(d).
Germany
Germany’s Law Introducing the International Crimes Code (2002) punishes anyone who, in connection with an international or a non-international armed conflict, “impedes relief supplies, in contravention of international humanitarian law”. 
Germany, Law Introducing the International Crimes Code, 2002, Article 1, § 11(1)(5).
Ireland
Ireland’s Geneva Conventions Act (1962), as amended in 1998, provides that any “minor breach” of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, including violations of Article 23 of the Geneva Convention IV, and of the 1977 Additional Protocol I, including violations of Article 70(3), is a punishable offence. 
Ireland, Geneva Conventions Act, 1962, as amended in 1998, Section 4(1) and (4).
Mali
Under Mali’s Penal Code (2001), “deliberately starving civilians as a method of warfare, by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions” is a war crime in international armed conflicts. 
Mali, Penal Code, 2001, Article 31(i)(25).
Netherlands
Under the International Crimes Act (2003) of the Netherlands, “intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions” is a crime, when committed in an international armed conflict. 
Netherlands, International Crimes Act, 2003, Article 5(5)(l).
New Zealand
Under New Zealand’s International Crimes and ICC Act (2000), war crimes include the crime defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
New Zealand, International Crimes and ICC Act, 2000, Section 11(2).
Norway
Norway’s Military Penal Code (1902), as amended in 1981, provides:
Anyone who contravenes or is accessory to the contravention of provisions relating to the protection of persons or property laid down in … the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 … [and in] the two additional protocols to these Conventions … is liable to imprisonment. 
Norway, Military Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 1981, § 108.
Norway
Norway’s Penal Code (1902), as amended in 2008, states: “Any person is liable to punishment for a war crime who in connection with an armed conflict … uses starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by … impeding relief supplies in violation of international law.” 
Norway, Penal Code, 1902, as amended in 2008, § 106(b).
Peru
Peru’s Code of Military and Police Justice (2006) states:
A member of the military or police shall be imprisoned for a period of no less than eight and no more than 15 years if he or she in the context of an international or non-international armed conflict:
5. Causes or maintains the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare … by impeding relief supplies in violation of international humanitarian law. 
Peru, Code of Military and Police Justice, 2006, Article 95(5).
This article is no longer in force. Along with certain other articles in this legislation, it was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court (en banc decision for case file No. 0012-2006-PI-TC, 8 January 2007) because it does not stipulate a crime committed in the line of duty that would fall under the jurisdiction of a military court pursuant to Article 173 of Peru’s Constitution.
Peru
Peru’s Military and Police Criminal Code (2010), in a chapter entitled “Crimes involving the use of prohibited methods in the conduct of hostilities”, states:
A member of the military or the police shall be punished with deprivation of liberty of not less than six years and not more than twenty-five years if, in a state of emergency and when the Armed Forces assume control of the internal order, he or she:
5. Causes or maintains the starvation of civilians as a method of conducting hostilities … by impeding the supply of aid in violation of International Humanitarian Law. 
Peru, Military and Police Criminal Code, 2010, Article 91(5).
Philippines
The Act on Child Protection (1992) of the Philippines contains an article on “children in situations of armed conflicts” which states that “delivery of basic social services such as … emergency relief services shall be kept unhampered”. 
Philippines, Act on Child Protection, 1992, Article X, Section 22(c).
Republic of Korea
The Republic of Korea’s ICC Act (2007) provides for the punishment of crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute. These include the war crime of “[u]sing starvation of civilians as a method of warfare … by impeding supplies of [objects indispensable to their survival] in violation of international humanitarian law” and the crime against humanity of “[t]he intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population”. These crimes apply in both international and non-international armed conflicts. 
Republic of Korea, ICC Act, 2007, Articles 9(2)(1) and 13(1)(5).
Rwanda
Rwanda’s Law Repressing the Crime of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes (2003) provides:
Article: 10
“War crime” shall also mean any of the following acts committed in armed conflicts:
9° starving the civilian population and preventing humanitarian assistance from reaching it;
Article: 11
Anyone who commits one of the war crimes provided for in Article 10 of this law shall be punished by the following penalties:
1° the death penalty or life imprisonment where he has committed a crime provided for in point 1°, 4°, 5°, 6°, 9° or 10° of Article 10 of this law. 
Rwanda, Law Repressing the Crime of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and War Crimes, 2003, Articles 10–11.
South Africa
South Africa’s ICC Act (2002) reproduces the war crimes listed in the 1998 ICC Statute, including in international armed conflicts: “intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare by … wilfully impeding relief supplies as provided for under the Geneva Conventions”. 
South Africa, ICC Act, 2002, Schedule 1, Part 3, § (b)(xxv).
Spain
Spain’s Penal Code (1995), as amended in 2010, states:
Anyone who [commits any of the following acts] during armed conflict shall be punished with three to seven years’ imprisonment:
8. Intentionally using starvation of the civilian population as a method of warfare, depriving it of indispensable supplies … including by arbitrarily impeding the provision of [humanitarian] assistance, which is carried out in conformity with the [1949] Geneva Conventions and its [1977] Additional Protocols. 
Spain, Penal Code, 1995, as amended on 23 June 2010, Article 612(8).
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Military Criminal Code (1927), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states in a chapter entitled “War crimes”:
Art. 110
Articles 112–114 apply in the context of international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, and, if the nature of the offence does not exclude it, in the context of non-international armed conflicts.
Art. 112c
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than three years for any person who, in the context of an armed conflict:
c. as a method of warfare, … deprives civilians of objects indispensable to their survival or impedes relief consignments. 
Switzerland, Military Criminal Code, 1927, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Articles 110 and 112c (1)(c).
Switzerland
Switzerland’s Penal Code (1937), taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, states under the title “War crimes”:
Art. 264b
Articles 264d–264j apply in the context of international armed conflicts, including in situations of occupation, and, if the nature of the offence does not exclude it, in the context of non-international armed conflicts.
Art. 264g
1 The penalty shall be a custodial sentence of not less than three years for any person who, in the context of an armed conflict:
c. as a method of warfare … deprives civilians of objects indispensable to their survival or impedes relief consignments. 
Switzerland, Penal Code, 1937, taking into account amendments entered into force up to 2011, Articles 264b and 264g (1)(c).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Under the UK ICC Act (2001), it is a punishable offence to commit a war crime as defined in Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the 1998 ICC Statute. 
United Kingdom, ICC Act, 2001, Sections 50(1) and 51(1) (England and Wales) and Section 58(1) (Northern Ireland).
Uruguay
Uruguay’s Law on Cooperation with the ICC (2006) states:
26.2. Persons and objects affected by the war crimes set out in the present provision are persons and objects which international law protects in international or internal armed conflict.
26.3. The following are war crimes:
33. Intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare or of combat by depriving them of objects indispensable to their survival, including wilfully impeding relief supplies or access to the victims as provided for under the [1949] Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law. 
Uruguay, Law on Cooperation with the ICC, 2006, Article 26.2 and 26.3.33.
Canada
In 2013, in the Sapkota case, Canada’s Federal Court dismissed a request for review of a decision denying refugee protection to the applicant on grounds of complicity in crimes against humanity in Nepal between 1991 and 2009. While reviewing the submissions of the respondent, Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Court stated: “The Respondent notes that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court … is endorsed in Canada as a source of customary law.” 
Canada, Federal Court, Sapkota case, Reasons for Judgment and Judgment, 15 July 2013, § 28.
Israel
In its judgment in the Albasyouni case in 2008, concerning a petition regarding the Israeli Government’s decision to reduce or limit the supply of fuel and electricity to the Gaza Strip, Israel’s High Court of Justice stated:
14. The State’s arguments are based on norms of international customary law, which specifies the basic obligations applying to parties engaged in an armed conflict, and requires the parties to ensure the wellbeing of the civilian population and protect its dignity and fundamental rights. It would not be superfluous to add that, under customary international humanitarian law, every party to the conflict must refrain from impeding the passage of basic humanitarian relief to the population requiring such in areas under the control of that party to the conflict …
15. The above indicates, therefore, that the Respondents do not disagree that they are bound by the humanitarian obligations imposed upon them, which require the State of Israel to allow passage of vital humanitarian goods to the Gaza Strip …
22. … [T]he State of Israel is required to act against the terrorist organizations within the framework of the law and in accordance with the dictates of international law, and to refrain from deliberately harming the civilian population located in the Gaza Strip. 
Israel, High Court of Justice, Albasyouni case, Judgment, 30 January 2008, §§ 14, 15 and 22.
Bangladesh
In 2010, during a debate of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee of the UN General Assembly, the First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Bangladesh stated:
We are gravely concerned by the serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by Israel [in the occupied territories] … Increasing numbers of movement and access blockades … are worsening the humanitarian situation. Even the flotilla carrying relief supplies to the Gaza Strip in international waters was not spared from the Israeli attacks.
We express our deep concern over the precarious humanitarian situation, and urge Israel to lift its embargo against Palestinians and immediately open all border crossings to allow for the free movement of … humanitarian aid. 
Bangladesh, Statement by the First Secretary of the Permanent Mission of Bangladesh at the General Debate of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee during the 65th Session of the UN General Assembly, 8 November 2010.
Belgium
In 2007, during a debate in the UN Security Council on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the representative of Belgium stated:
… Belgium condemns in the strongest terms the refusal to grant access to humanitarian workers in conflict situations. … The [Security] Council must use all of its influence in order to guarantee total access in full security for humanitarian staff. 
Belgium, Statement by the permanent representative of Belgium before the UN Security Council on “Protection of civilians in armed conflict”, 22 June 2007, p. 26.
Bosnia and Herzegovina
In its Application Instituting Proceedings in the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) in 1993, Bosnia and Herzegovina:
requests the court to adjudge and declare …:
That Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) and its agents and surrogates are under an obligation to cease and desist immediately from its breaches of the foregoing legal obligations, and is under a particular duty to cease and desist immediately:
- from the interruption of, interference with, or harassment of humanitarian relief supplies to the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina by the international community. 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Application instituting proceedings, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro), 20 March 1993, § 135.
Canada
In 2005, in a statement before the UN Commission on Human Rights on the human rights situation in Sudan, made on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the representative of Canada stated:
While the Government of Sudan is responsible for the lack of protection afforded to civilians and for many of the serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law amounting to crimes … rebel groups and armed militias share the responsibility for such egregious crimes as well. … Armed groups are also carrying out attacks against humanitarian workers, impeding their ability to help an increasingly vulnerable population. Sadly, unimpeded humanitarian access in Darfur is still not fully realised.
We call on the Government of Sudan to acknowledge these violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, and for it and all parties to the conflict in Darfur to take the necessary measures to halt the atrocities being committed against the civilian population and to respect their international legal obligations. Furthermore, armed militias and rebel groups must immediately cease all actions that impede the delivery of humanitarian aid. 
Canada, Statement by the representative of Canada before the UN Commission on Human Rights on the human rights situation in Sudan, made on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, 2005, p. 1.
Canada
In 2012, in a statement before the UN Security Council during an open debate on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the permanent representative of Canada stated that “the denial of humanitarian access [is] of great concern … In too many contexts, humanitarian access is politicized and constrained. Civilians in need of assistance are held hostage to the whims of governments and of non-state armed groups.” 
Canada, Statement by the permanent representative of Canada before the UN Security Council during an open debate on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, 25 June 2012.
Canada
In 2013, in a statement before the UN Security Council during an open debate on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the permanent representative of Canada stated:
The brutal conflict in Syria represents a stark example of how much work remains to be achieved to better protect civilians who are routinely victims of deliberate and targeted attacks, as are hospitals, medical facilities and health care workers. The result is that people in desperate need are denied lifesaving humanitarian assistance. … We call on the Security Council … to issue a resolution allowing for the cross-border delivery of humanitarian assistance.
While the crisis in Syria is perhaps the most prominent example of current challenges to the protection of civilians, it is far from unique. …
In too many instances, humanitarian access is politicized and deliberately constrained. Civilians in need of assistance are held hostage to the whims of governments and of non-state armed groups trying to achieve their own political gains. 
Canada, Statement by the permanent representative of Canada before the UN Security Council during an open debate on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, 19 August 2013, p. 2.
China
In 1992, during a debate in the UN Security Council, China condemned the hampering of the delivery of humanitarian aid in Bosnia and Herzegovina and declared that it was “deeply concerned with and disturbed by such a situation”. 
China, Statement before the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/PV.3082, 30 May 1992, p. 8.
Cuba
In 2009, in a statement before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, the representative of Cuba stated: “Throughout the year, Israel continued to severely limit … the movement of persons and goods, including food and medicine.” 
Cuba, Statement by the representative of Cuba before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on Item 31: United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, 2 November 2009, p. 1.
Cuba
In 2009, in a statement before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on the report of the special committee to investigate Israeli practices affecting the human rights of the Palestinian people and other Arabs of the occupied territories, the representative of Cuba stated:
Cuba expresses its strong concern at the constant deterioration of the situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, owing … to … illegal policies and practices, like the inhumane and destructive measures of collective punishment of the Palestinian civilian population, which violate the rights of the Palestinian people and worsen their socio-economic condition, resulting in a dire humanitarian crisis.
Israel continues with its closure policy, including the incessant sealing off of the Gaza Strip and the unjust and inhumane blockade of its inhabitants. 
Cuba, Statement by the representative of Cuba before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on Item 32: Report of the Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human Rights of the Palestinian People and Other Arabs of the Occupied Territories, 10 November 2009, pp. 1–2.
Cuba
In 2010, in a statement before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, the representative of Cuba stated:
This year, following the criminal attack committed by the special forces of the Israeli Army, in the early morning of 31 May, against a flotilla of ships that were in international waters and were carrying humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people living in the Gaza Strip, Cuba called on the international community to request the Israeli authorities to immediately lift the illegal, ruthless and genocidal blockade against the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip.
Notwithstanding, for the fourth consecutive year, Israel continues to severely limit … the movement of … goods, including food and medicine. The prohibition on the entry of building materials has prevented ... reconstruction …
Reconstruction work in Gaza after the war has not materialised as a result of the intransigence of the Israeli government and the complicated bureaucratic procedures for the entry of construction materials. Cuba condemns Israel’s aggressive policy, which ignores the repeated calls by the international community and the successive resolutions adopted by different organs of the United Nations, in flagrant violation of international law. 
Cuba, Statement by the representative of Cuba before the Fourth Committee of the UN General Assembly on Item 51: United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, 2 November 2010, pp. 1–2.
Cuba
In 2010, in a statement before the UN General Assembly on the Palestinian question, the ambassador and permanent representative of Cuba stated:
Reconstruction work in Gaza after the war has not materialised as a result of the bureaucratic red tape and restrictions that the Israeli government applies to access for construction materials.
As part of the inhumane blockade against the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip, Israel continues to severely limit the freedom of movement of Palestinians, imposing a humiliating and discriminatory network of hundreds of checkpoints, continues with its policy of closed borders, imposes physical barriers on roads used by Palestinians, limits the movement of persons and goods such as food, medicine, fuel and other essential humanitarian supplies. 
Cuba, Statement by the ambassador and permanent representative of Cuba before the UN General Assembly on Item 37: The Palestinian Question, 29 November 2010, p. 1.
Egypt
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
Ethiopia
In the context of the conflict in Ethiopia, it has been reported that food was used as a weapon:
[At the time of the 1984–1985 famine in northern Ethiopia,] to make matters worse, Mengistu refused to allow food to be distributed in areas where inhabitants were sympathetic to the EPLF [Eritrean People’s Liberation Front], TPLF [Tigray People’s Liberation Front], or other antigovernment groups, a strategy that resulted in the deaths of tens of thousands. When a new famine emerged in late 1989, threatening the lives of 2 million to 5 million people, Mengistu again used food as a weapon by banning the movement of relief supplies along the main road north from Addis Ababa to Tigray and also along the road from Mitsiwa into Eritrea and south into Tigray. As a result, food relief vehicles had to travel overland from Port Sudan, the major Red Sea port of Sudan, through guerrilla territory into northern Ethiopia. After an international outcry against his policy, Mengistu reversed his decision, but international relief agencies were unable to move significant amounts of food aid into Eritrea and Tigray via Ethiopian ports. 
Thomas P. Ofcansky and LaVerle Berry (eds.), Ethiopia: A Country Study, Government Printing Office, Washington D.C., Fourth edition, 1993, p. 328; see also p. 305.
France
In 2009, in a statement calling for the respect of international humanitarian law, which provided examples of serious violations that had recently occurred in several armed conflicts around the world, namely in Sri Lanka, Darfur, Somalia ad Iraq, the Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of France noted: “Access is impeded to humanitarian aid and aid workers, plunging civilians into total destitution and depriving them of the most basic medical treatment.” 
France, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, “The Savaging of Humanitarian Law”, New York Times, 28 January 2009, p. 2.
France
In 2009, the Minister of Foreign and European Affairs of France stated:
Violations of humanitarian law are ever increasing, as the current crises are unfortunately there to remind us, whether we are looking at Darfur, Somalia, Gaza, Sri Lanka or the Kivus. … Worse still, access to victims is often not guaranteed and those who come to their aid are regularly targeted, obstructed or harassed.
We must react! 
France, Minister of Foreign and European Affairs, “International Humanitarian Law, an Imperative”, La Croix, 12 February 2009, p. 1.
France
In 2009, the President of the French Republic stated:
There have never been as many humanitarian personnel deployed in the field but the barriers imposed on their action have never been so many …
The NGOs expelled from Darfur must be able to return. The humanitarian actors must have access to the civilians imprisoned at the combat zone in Sri Lanka. They must be able to accomplish their mission in Afghanistan, in Iraq, in the Democratic Republic of Congo and in Somalia, without becoming targets or hostages of the forces present [in the field] …
… [E]very time a country prevents humanitarian personnel from assisting the civilian population, France will act at the international level in order to condemn the action of such country.
… No country has the right to take its people hostage … [I]t is unspeakable that an established power obstructs the entry of humanitarian assistance. 
France, Address by the President of the French Republic on the 90th Anniversary of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, 4 May 2009, pp. 3–5.
Georgia
In 2012, in its fourth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, Georgia stated:
During the reporting period, the Government of Georgia has been consistently continuing its policy aimed at ensuring full enjoyment of the rights provided in the Covenant for the entire State population. To this end, the obstacles of outstanding gravity were imposed by the war with the Russian Federation in August 2008 and subsequent occupation of two regions – Abkhazia, Georgia and the Tskhinvali region/South Ossetia, Georgia. From … early 2008, the security and human rights situation in the mentioned regions tangibly aggravated … The terrorizing and discriminatory acts included, but were not limited to … cutting the humanitarian access and the utility supplies to the villages … 
Georgia, Fourth periodic report to the Human Rights Committee, 1 November 2012, UN Doc. CCPR/GEO/4, submitted 25 June 2012, § 3.
Germany
In 1994, in a statement in the lower house of parliament, a German Minister of State, in line with the other members of the EU, condemned the hampering of humanitarian aid in Sudan. 
Germany, Lower House of Parliament, Statement by a Minister of State, 3 March 1994, Plenarprotokoll 12/213, p. 18469.
Germany
In 1996, during a debate in the UN General Assembly, Germany called upon all parties to the conflict in Afghanistan not to hamper humanitarian aid. 
Germany, Statement before the UN General Assembly, UN Doc. A/51/PV.84, 13 December 1996, p. 7.
Germany
In 2004, during a debate in the UN Security Council, the representative of Germany stated:
There are new actors in the area of the protection of civilians in armed conflict whom we have to deal with. More than ever before, we need constructive engagement with non-State armed groups. They not only have the potential to deny humanitarian actors humanitarian access; they actually do it. 
Germany, Statement before the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/PV.4990, 14 June 2004, p. 25.
Islamic Republic of Iran
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
Mexico
In 2009, during a debate in the UN Security Council on children and armed conflict, the permanent representative of Mexico stated: “We condemn all acts that jeopardize the integrity of children, such as … denial of humanitarian access”. 
Mexico, Statement by the permanent representative before the UN Security Council, 6114th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.6114, 29 April 2009, p. 29.
Malaysia
In 2010, during the consideration of the status of the 1977 Additional Protocols by the Sixth Committee of the UN General Assembly, a statement of the delegation of Malaysia was summarized by the Committee in its records as follows:
8. [The delegate of Malaysia] said that …
10. … [t]he laws of naval warfare incorporated the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law, including necessity and proportionality …
11. [and that]… [u]nder the established laws of naval blockade, a blockade was prohibited … if it was used to prevent the free passage of relief consignments. 
Malaysia, Statement by the delegation of Malaysia before the Sixth Committee of the UN General Assembly on the Status of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the protection of victims of armed conflict, 18 October 2010, as published in the summary record of the 13th meeting, 8 December 2010, UN Doc. A/C.6/65/SR.13, §§ 8, 10 and 11.
Mexico
In 2010, during a debate in the UN Security Council on the situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question, the permanent representative of Mexico stated:
We are dismayed and surprised by the grave events that took place along the coasts of the Mediterranean off the Gaza Strip today. We condemn in the strongest terms the armed attack carried out by the armed forces of Israel in international waters against the flotilla of civilian boats seeking to carry humanitarian aid to the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip. …
[R]estrictions on access to humanitarian assistance … are serious violations of the norms and principles of international humanitarian law, in accordance with the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of … [1977]. They also constitute international crimes. We also believe that actions of that type, which are contrary to international law, arbitrarily limit the right to the freedom of legitimate navigation.
Such regrettable facts confirm that the blockade on Gaza … deeply affects the civilian population … Therefore we once again urge the Government of Israel to lift the blockade against the Gaza Strip so as to allow the access of humanitarian aid to the population, whose situation has been grounds for great concern to the international community since the end of the conflict in that territory in January 2009. 
Mexico, Statement by the permanent representative before the UN Security Council, 6325th meeting, UN Doc. S/PV.6325, 31 May 2010, pp. 6–7.
Norway
In 2004, during a debate in the UN Security Council on protection of civilians in armed conflict, the representative of Norway stated: “Safe and unimpeded access to vulnerable groups is key to ensuring an effective protection of civilians in armed conflict. Denial of access is completely unacceptable.” 
Norway, Statement by the deputy permanent representative of Norway during the UN Security Council debate on protection of civilians in armed conflict, 14 June 2004.
Pakistan
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
Saudi Arabia
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
Senegal
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
Sri Lanka
In 2008, in its initial report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child under the 2000 Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, Sri Lanka stated:
36. The former Special Representative of the [UN] Secretary-General on Children and Armed Conflict Mr. Olara Otunnu was invited by the Government to visit Sri Lanka in May 1998, to add strength to the advocacy campaign against child recruitment. … The LTTE [Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] made the following commitments in relation to children in armed conflict to Mr. Otunnu during his meeting with the LTTE[:]
(c) The LTTE … made a commitment not to interfere with the distribution of humanitarian supplies targeted for the affected civilians, and accepted that a framework to monitor this process should be enforced …
37. These commitments were not implemented by the LTTE. …
109. Children vulnerable to recruitment in the war affected areas have had continued access to immunization services. National Immunisation Days were carried out in conflict areas even during the height of the conflict, in the 1990s. These activities were undertaken through the organisation of “Days of Tranquillity” and “Corridors of Peace” by the Government and Ministry of Health in collaboration with UNICEF and civil society organizations such as Rotary. The programme enabled parents to bring their children to immunisation centres. All services were provided by local Ministry of Health staff. INGOs [international NGOs] and NGOs in addition to Rotary helped in such activities, including ICRC and UNHCR. The LTTE did not create barriers to such activities at that time. 
Sri Lanka, Initial report to the Committee on the Rights of the Child under the Optional Protocol on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, 15 February 2010, UN Doc. CRC/C/OPAC/LKA/1, submitted 16 June 2008, §§ 36(c), 37 and 109.
[footnote in original omitted]
Sweden
In 2007, in a speech given at the EU Africa Summit, the Prime Minister of Sweden stated: “No quest for stability can justify the denial of humanitarian access … Human suffering and violations against civilians must come to an end in places like Darfur and Somalia.” 
Sweden, Speech by the Prime Minister of Sweden at the EU Africa Summit, Lisbon, 8 December 2007.
Switzerland
In 2009, in its Report on Foreign Policy, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
One of the primary concerns of humanitarian law and policy is to guarantee access to victims and to provide assistance to them. However, it frequently occurs that one or several of the parties in conflict impede or prohibit access to these populations or that it is impossible to ensure the security of humanitarian actors. This was once more clearly evident in the Gaza Strip at the end of 2008 and at the beginning of 2009. Switzerland called upon all the parties to the conflict to allow rapid and unimpeded humanitarian access and to protect medical personnel, hospitals and other medical units. 
Switzerland, Federal Council, Report on Foreign Policy 2009, 2 September 2009, Section 3.3.7.3, p. 5811.
Switzerland
In 2010, in its Report on IHL and Current Armed Conflicts, Switzerland’s Federal Council stated:
3.1 Growing importance of non-State actors
… Humanitarian aid – despite its impartial, neutral and independent character – is thus only authorized with hesitation when it is used by insurgents. …
3.4 [Growing use of] anti-guerrilla tactics
Apart from the direct fight against insurgents, international humanitarian law also addresses other anti-guerrilla tactics. It prohibits, for example, the refusal of humanitarian assistance, thus obliging the parties to the conflict to ensure at any moment the protection of civilians against the dangers resulting from military operations. 
Switzerland, Federal Council, Report on IHL and Current Armed Conflicts, 17 September 2010, Sections 3.1 and 3.4, pp. 6 and 15.
[footnotes in original omitted]
Turkey
In 1992, in a letter addressed to the President of the UN Security Council, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey stated:
The unhindered delivery of humanitarian relief to all parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the population of Sarajevo, should get under way immediately. To this end … effective measures must be taken to stop anyone from hindering the delivery of humanitarian assistance. 
Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Senegal and Turkey, Letter dated 5 October 1992 to the President of the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/24620, 6 October 1992, § (a).
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 1993, during a debate in the UN Security Council, the UK representative stated:
The United Kingdom Government has been horrified at the continued evidence of massive breaches of international humanitarian law and human rights in the former Yugoslavia … [including] the deliberate obstruction of humanitarian relief convoys. 
United Kingdom, Statement before the UN Security Council, UN Doc. S/PV.3217, 25 May 1993, p. 17.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
In 2008, a UK Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, wrote to the House of Lords in response to a question concerning the lawfulness of the Israeli blockade of Gaza:
We have serious concerns about the Israeli restrictions on Gaza and the impact they have on the lives of Gazans. Although there is no permanent physical Israeli presence in Gaza, given the significant control that Israel has over Gaza’s borders, airspace and territorial waters, Israel retains obligations under the [1949] Fourth Geneva Convention as an occupying power. …The restrictions currently imposed on the passage of relief supplies are, as we see it, a disproportionate response to the security threat.
The extent of Israeli restrictions, and the threat to Israel from militants in Gaza, varies constantly. Rather than focus on whether the restrictions at any given time amount to collective punishment, we have consistently pressed the Israeli Government to comply with their obligations under international law … This was the message my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary delivered in his meetings with Israeli leaders during his recent visit to the region.  
United Kingdom, House of Lords, Written Answer by a Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Hansard, 26 November 2008, Vol. 705, Written Answers, col. WA320.
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
The UK Government Strategy on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict (2010) states under the heading “Improving humanitarian access”:
Unfortunately, in many conflict affected countries humanitarian access is increasingly unsafe, delayed and otherwise restricted, leaving millions of vulnerable people deprived of life-saving protection and assistance. 
United Kingdom, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Government Strategy on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict, March 2010, p. 10.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council demanded that “all parties and others concerned create immediately the necessary conditions for unimpeded delivery of humanitarian supplies to Sarajevo and other destinations in Bosnia and Herzegovina”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 758, 8 June 1992, § 8, adopted without a vote.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council underlined “the urgency of quick delivery of humanitarian assistance to Sarajevo and its environs”. It further stressed that, if the delivery of humanitarian assistance was hampered, it did not “exclude other measures to deliver humanitarian aid to Sarajevo and its environs”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 761, 29 June 1992, preamble and § 4, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on humanitarian assistance to Sarajevo and other parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council expressed its dismay at the “continuation of conditions that impede the delivery of humanitarian supplies to destinations within Bosnia and Herzegovina and the consequent suffering of the people of that country”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 770, 13 August 1992, preamble, voting record: 12-0-3.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992, the UN Security Council expressed “grave alarm at continuing reports of widespread violations of international humanitarian law occurring within the territory of the former Yugoslavia including … impeding the delivery of food and medical supplies to the civilian population”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 771, 13 August 1992, preamble, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council:
Condemns all violations of international humanitarian law, including … the deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and medical supplies to the civilian population of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and reaffirms that those that commit or order the commission of such acts will be held individually responsible in respect of such acts. 
UN Security Council, Res. 787, 16 November 1992, § 7, voting record: 13-0-2.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on Somalia, the UN Security Council:
Determining that the magnitude of the human tragedy caused by the conflict in Somalia, further exacerbated by the obstacles being created to the distribution of humanitarian assistance, constitutes a threat to international peace and security,
5. Strongly condemns all violations of international humanitarian law occurring in Somalia, including in particular the deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and medical supplies essential for the survival of the civilian population, and affirms that those who commit or order the commission of such acts will be held individually responsible in respect of such acts. 
UN Security Council, Res. 794, 3 December 1992, preamble and § 5, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1993 on the treatment of certain towns and surroundings in Bosnia and Herzegovina as safe areas, the UN Security Council condemned all violations of IHL in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in particular, “the denial or the obstruction of access of civilians to humanitarian aid and services such as medical assistance and basic utilities”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 824, 6 May 1993, preamble, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1993 on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council reiterated its condemnation of “the obstruction, primarily by the Bosnian Serb party, of the delivery of humanitarian assistance”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 836, 4 June 1993, preamble, voting record: 13-0-2.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on extension of the mandate and increase of the personnel of the UN Protection Force, the UN Security Council demanded that “the Bosnian Serb party … remove all obstacles to free access [to besieged Maglaj]”, condemned all such obstacles and called upon all parties to show restraint. 
UN Security Council, Res. 908, 31 March 1994, § 22, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on Angola, the UN Security Council condemned “any action, including laying of landmines, which threatens the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian assistance to all in need in Angola”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 945, 29 September 1994, § 10, voting record: 15-0-0.
This condemnation was reiterated in a subsequent resolution. 
UN Security Council, Res. 952, 27 October 1994, § 7, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1995 on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council declared itself “gravely concerned that the regular obstruction of deliveries of humanitarian assistance, and the denial of the use of Sarajevo airport, by the Bosnian Serb side threaten the ability of the United Nations in Bosnia and Herzegovina to carry out its mandate”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 998, 16 June 1995, preamble, voting record: 13-0-2.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 1997 on Sierra Leone, the UN Security Council called upon the junta “to cease all interference with the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people of Sierra Leone”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 1132, 8 October 1997, § 2, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 2004 on children and armed conflict, the UN Security Council strongly condemned certain crimes involving children in armed conflict, including “denial of humanitarian access to children”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 1539, 22 April 2004, § 1, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 2005 on the situation between Eritrea and Ethiopia, the UN Security Council called on Eritrea “to lift all restrictions imposed on the operations of aid organizations, to enable them to carry out their humanitarian activities”. 
UN Security Council, Res. 1622, 13 September 2005, § 11, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 2006 on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the UN Security Council:
5. Reaffirms also its condemnation in the strongest terms of all acts of violence or abuses committed against civilians in situations of armed conflict in violation of applicable international obligations with respect in particular to … (vii) the intentional denial of humanitarian assistance, and demands that all parties put an end to such practices. 
UN Security Council, Res. 1674, 28 April 2006, § 5, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In a resolution adopted in 2007 on the Sudan, the UN Security Council:
Reiterates its concern over the restrictions and all the impediments placed on the movements of UNMIS personnel and materiel, and the adverse impact such restrictions and impediments have on UNMIS ability to perform its mandate effectively and on the ability of the humanitarian community to reach affected persons; and calls upon all the parties to abide by its international obligations in this regard. 
UN Security Council, Res. 1784, 31 October 2007, preamble, voting record: 15-0-0.
UN Security Council
In 1992, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council demanded “the immediate cessation of attacks and all actions aimed at impeding the distribution of humanitarian assistance and at forcing the inhabitants of Sarajevo to leave the city”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/24932, 9 December 1992.
UN Security Council
In January 1993, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council reaffirms its demand that all parties and others concerned, in particular Serb paramilitary units, cease and desist forthwith from all violations of international humanitarian law being committed in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina, including in particular the deliberate interference with humanitarian convoys. The Council warns the parties concerned of serious consequences, in accordance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council, if they continue to impede the delivery of humanitarian relief assistance. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/25162, 25 January 1993, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In February 1993, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council noted with deep concern that, “notwithstanding the Council’s demand in that statement [of 25 January 1993], relief efforts continue to be impeded”. It further condemned “the blocking of humanitarian convoys and the impeding of relief supplies, which place at risk the civilian population of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/25302, 17 February 1993, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In February 1993, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council stated:
[The Security Council] is deeply concerned that, in spite of its repeated demands, relief efforts continue to be impeded by Serb paramilitary units, especially in the eastern part of the country, namely in the enclaves of Srebrenica, Cerska, Goražde and Žepa.
… It regards the blockade of relief efforts as a serious impediment to a negotiated settlement in Bosnia and Herzegovina …
The deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and humanitarian relief essential for the survival of the civilian population in Bosnia and Herzegovina constitutes a violation of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Council is committed to ensuring that individuals responsible for such acts are brought to justice.
The Council strongly condemns once again the blocking of humanitarian convoys that has impeded the delivery of humanitarian supplies. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/25334, 25 February 1993, pp. 1 and 2.
UN Security Council
In April 1993, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council is shocked by and extremely alarmed at the dire and worsening humanitarian situation which has developed in Srebrenica … following the unacceptable decision of the Bosnian Serb party not to permit any further humanitarian aid to be delivered to that town …
Recognizing the imperative need to alleviate, with the utmost urgency, the sufferings of the population in and around Srebrenica, who are in desperate need of food, medicine, clothes and shelter, the Council demands that the Bosnian Serb party cease and desist forthwith from all violations of international humanitarian law, including in particular the deliberate interference with humanitarian convoys. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/25520, 3 April 1993, p. 1.
The Security Council considered that the blocking of UN humanitarian relief efforts was directly related to the practice of “ethnic cleansing”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/25520, 3 April 1993, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In July 1993, in a statement by its President on the situation in Sarajevo in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council demanded “an end … to the blocking of, and interference with, the delivery of humanitarian relief by both the Bosnian Serb and the Bosnian Croat parties”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/26134, 22 July 1993, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1994, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council … deplores the failure of the parties to honour the agreements they have signed … to permit the delivery of humanitarian assistance. …
The Security Council strongly deplores the abhorrent practice of deliberate obstruction of humanitarian relief convoys by any party. … The Council further demands that all parties fully abide by their commitments in this regard and facilitate timely delivery of humanitarian aid. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1994/1, 7 January 1994, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1994, in a statement by its President on the situation in Haiti, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council attaches great importance to humanitarian assistance in Haiti, including the unimpeded delivery and distribution of fuel used for humanitarian purposes. It will hold responsible any authorities and individuals in Haiti who might in any way interfere with the delivery and distribution of humanitarian assistance under the overall responsibility of PAHO or who fail in their responsibility to ensure that this delivery and distribution benefits the intended recipients: those in need of humanitarian assistance. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1994/2, 10 January 1994, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1994, in a statement by its President on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council notes with particular concern reports of the recurrent obstruction and looting of humanitarian aid convoys destined for the civilian population of Maglaj, including the most recent incident which took place on 10 March 1994, in which six trucks were prevented from reaching the town. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1994/11, 14 March 1994, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1994, in a statement by its President on the situation in Rwanda, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council … also condemns the ongoing interference by [the former Rwandan leaders and former government forces and militias] and individuals in the provision of humanitarian relief, and is deeply concerned that this interference has already led to the withdrawal of some non-governmental agencies responsible for the distribution of relief supplies within the [refugee] camps. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1994/75, 30 November 1994, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1996, in a statement by its President on the situation in Somalia, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council considers the uninterrupted delivery of humanitarian assistance to be a crucial factor in the overall security and stability of Somalia. In this respect, the closure of Mogadishu main seaport and other transportation facilities severely aggravates the present situation and poses a potential major impediment to future emergency deliveries. The Council calls upon the Somali parties and factions to open those facilities unconditionally. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1996/4, 24 January 1996, p. 2.
UN Security Council
In 1996, in a statement by its President on the situation in Afghanistan, the UN Security Council called on the parties involved “to end the hostilities forthwith and not to obstruct the delivery of humanitarian aid and other needed supplies to the innocent civilians of the city”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1996/6, 15 February 1996, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1997, in a statement by its President on the situation in the Great Lakes region, the UN Security Council expressed its dismay at “acts of violence which have hampered the delivery of humanitarian assistance”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1997/22, 24 April 1997, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1997, in a statement by its President on the situation in the Great Lakes region, the UN Security Council expressed “concern at reports of obstruction of humanitarian assistance efforts”, but noted that “humanitarian access has improved recently”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1997/24, 30 April 1997, p. 1.
UN Security Council
In 1997, in a statement by its President on the situation in Sierra Leone, the UN Security Council called upon the military junta “to cease all interference with the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the people of Sierra Leone”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1997/42, 6 August 1997, p. 2.
UN Security Council
In July 1998, in a statement by its President on the situation in Afghanistan, the UN Security Council called upon all Afghan factions “to lift unconditionally any blockade of humanitarian relief supplies”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1998/22, 14 July 1998, p. 2.
UN Security Council
In August 1998, in a statement by its President on the situation in Afghanistan, the UN Security Council stated:
The Security Council … calls upon all Afghan parties and, in particular, the Taliban, to take the necessary steps to secure the uninterrupted supply of humanitarian aid to all in need of it and in this connection not to create impediments to the activities of the United Nations humanitarian agencies and international humanitarian organizations.  
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/1998/24, 6 August 1998, p. 2.
UN Security Council
In 2006, in a statement by its President on children and armed conflict, the UN Security Council strongly condemned “denial of humanitarian access to children … by parties to armed conflict”. 
UN Security Council, Statement by the President, UN Doc. S/PRST/2006/48, 28 November 2006, p. 2.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN General Assembly expressed “grave alarm at continuing reports of widespread violations of international humanitarian law … including … impeding the delivery of food and medical supplies to the civilian population”. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 46/242, 25 August 1992, § 9, voting record: 136-1-5-37.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on the situation of human rights in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the UN General Assembly:
Condemns all deliberate impedance of the delivery of food, medical and other supplies essential for the civilian population, which constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, … and demands that all parties ensure that all persons under their control cease such acts. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 49/196, 23 December 1994, § 14, voting record: 150-0-14-21.
This condemnation and demand were repeated in a subsequent resolution in 1995. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 50/193, 22 December 1995, § 13, voting record: 144-1-20--20.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, the UN General Assembly expressed its concern that “access by the civilian population to humanitarian assistance continues to be impeded, which represents a threat to human life and constitutes an offence to human dignity”. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 49/198, 23 December 1994, preamble, voting record: 101-13-49-22.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1997 on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, the UN General Assembly expressed “its outrage at the use by all parties to the conflict of military force to disrupt … relief efforts” and called for “those responsible for such actions to be brought to justice”. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 52/140, 12 December 1997, § 2, voting record: 93-16-58-18.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1997 on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, the UN General Assembly requested “all the parties in Afghanistan to lift the restrictions imposed on the international aid community and allow the free transit of food and medical supplies to all populations of the country”. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 52/145, 12 December 1997, § 16, adopted without a vote.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 1998 on the situation of human rights in Kosovo, the UN General Assembly:
10. Strongly condemns the denial of appropriate access by non-governmental organizations to Kosovo, … calls upon the authorities of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) to take all measures necessary to eliminate these unacceptable practices forthwith. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 53/164, 9 December 1998, §10, voting record: 122-3-34-26.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 2003 on the strengthening of the coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations, the UN General Assembly:
7. Strongly condemns … any act or failure to act, contrary to international law, which obstructs or prevents humanitarian personnel and United Nations and its associated personnel from discharging their humanitarian functions. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 58/114, 17 December 2003, preamble and §§ 7–10, adopted without a vote.
UN General Assembly
In a resolution adopted in 2003 on the safety and security of humanitarian personnel and the protection of United Nations personnel, the UN General Assembly:
Strongly condemns any act or failure to act, contrary to international law, which obstructs or prevents humanitarian personnel and United Nations personnel from discharging their humanitarian functions, or which entails being subjected to threats, the use of force or physical attack, frequently resulting in injury or death, and affirms the need to hold accountable those who commit such acts and, for that purpose, the need to enact national legislation, as appropriate. 
UN General Assembly, Res. 58/122, 17 December 2003, § 6, adopted without a vote.
UN Economic and Social Council
In a resolution adopted in 2003 on the coordination of emergency humanitarian assistance of the United Nations, ECOSOC:
6. Strongly condemns any act, or failure to act, contrary to international law, which obstructs or prevents humanitarian personnel and United Nations personnel from discharging their humanitarian functions. 
ECOSOC, Res. 2003/5, 15 July 2003, § 6, adopted without a vote.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1983 on the situation of human rights in El Salvador, the UN Commission on Human Rights called upon all parties to the conflict in El Salvador “to co-operate fully and not to interfere with the activities of humanitarian organisations dedicated to alleviating the suffering of the civilian population wherever these organisations operate in El Salvador”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1983/29, 8 March 1983 § 10, voting record: 23-6-10.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on the situation of human rights in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, the UN Commission on Human Rights stated that it considered that “the deliberate impeding of delivery of food, medical and other supplies essential for the civilian population could constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1994/72, 9 March 1994, § 11, adopted without a vote.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1994 on the situation of human rights in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the UN Commission on Human Rights strongly condemned “the strategy of strangulation of populations by obstructing food supplies and other essentials to the civilian populations”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1994/75, 9 March 1994, § 1, voting record: 41-1-10.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1995 on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, the UN Commission on Human Rights stated that it was:
Deeply concerned that access by the civilian population to humanitarian assistance, despite some improvements, continues to be impeded, violating international humanitarian law and representing a threat to human life that constitutes an offence to human dignity. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1995/77, 8 March 1995, preamble, voting record: 33-7-10.
The Commission further expressed “its outrage at the use of military force by all parties to the conflict to disrupt … relief efforts aimed at assisting civilian populations” and called for “an end to such practices and for those responsible for such actions to be brought to justice”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1995/77, 8 March 1995, § 18, voting record: 33-7-10.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1995 on the situation of human rights in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro), the UN Commission on Human Rights condemned “all deliberate and arbitrary impeding of the delivery of food, medical and other supplies essential for the civilian population … which can constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1995/89, 8 March 1995, § 17, voting record: 44-0-7.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1996 on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, the UN Commission on Human Rights expressed deep concern that “access of international relief organizations to civilian populations critically at risk … continues to be severely impeded, violating international humanitarian law … and representing a threat to human life that constitutes an offence to human dignity”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1996/73, 23 April 1996, preamble, adopted without a vote.
UN Commission on Human Rights
In a resolution adopted in 1998 on the situation of human rights in the Sudan, the UN Commission on Human Rights expressed “its outrage at the use by all parties to the conflict of military force to disrupt … relief efforts”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Res. 1998/67, 21 April 1998, § 3, voting record: 31-6-16.
UN Secretary-General
In 1998, in an analytical report on “Minimum standards of humanity”, the UN Secretary-General drew attention to the fact that civilians “die from starvation or disease, when relief supplies are arbitrarily withheld from them”. 
UN Secretary-General, Analytical report submitted pursuant to UN Commission on Human Rights resolution 1997/21, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1998/87, 5 January 1998, § 27.
UN Secretary-General
In 2001, in a report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, the UN Secretary-General complained about the “failure of warring parties to admit the delivery of certain food items because they are perceived as jeopardizing the objectives of their war effort”. He also noted that “in times of conflict, many Governments often constitute the major impediment to any meaningful humanitarian assistance and protection”. 
UN Secretary-General, Report on the protection of civilians in armed conflict, UN Doc. S/2001/331, 30 March 2001, §§ 17 and 47.
UN Commission on Human Rights (Special Rapporteur)
In 1993, in a report on the situation of human rights in the territory of the former Yugoslavia, the Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights noted:
Humanitarian organizations are providing aid under very difficult conditions. The problem of access is particularly acute. Some places have been inaccessible to aid convoys owing to snow or bad roads; others have been made inaccessible by the refusal of the parties to the conflict to allow convoys to pass. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Former Yugoslavia, Report, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1993/50, 10 February 1993, § 114.
The Rapporteur added: “The humanitarian nature of aid convoys is being respected less and less and all parties to the conflict are creating obstacles to the delivery of humanitarian aid to those in need.” 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in the Former Yugoslavia, Report, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1993/50, 10 February 1993, § 117.
UN Commission on Human Rights (Special Rapporteur)
In 1997, in a report on the situation of human rights in Zaire (Democratic Republic of the Congo), the Special Rapporteur of the UN Commission on Human Rights denounced the fact that:
Humanitarian assistance has been impeded by all parties to the conflict. In the area controlled by AFDL [Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo/Zaire], ICRC complained on 10 December of encountering difficulties when entering the [refugee] camps, a complaint echoed by humanitarian NGOs. In the areas controlled by the Zairian Government, humanitarian action was generally accepted, although under the constant threat of closing the camps and expelling the refugees. Since the Air Liberia aircraft accident in July, however, access has become more difficult … IOM … was prevented from acting in Zaire on 27 September; all agencies came under suspicion. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Zaire, Report, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1997/6, 28 January 1997, § 209.
The Rapporteur added: “While it is not true to say that the agencies are permanently and systematically prevented from entering the refugee camps, it is often difficult for them to do so, leading to delays, which are extremely costly in terms of human lives.” 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Zaire, Report on the mission carried out at the request of the High Commissioner for Human Rights between 25 and 29 March 1997 to the area occupied by rebels in eastern Zaire, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1997/6/Add.2, 2 April 1997, § 35.
The Rapporteur further added: “UNHCR was unable to reach the [Lula refugee] camp because the [Alliance of Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Congo/Zaire] refused to grant it access, on the usual grounds that it was a military threat”. 
UN Commission on Human Rights, Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Zaire, Report on the mission carried out at the request of the High Commissioner for Human Rights between 25 and 29 March 1997 to the area occupied by rebels in eastern Zaire, UN Doc. E/CN.4/1997/6/Add.2, 2 April 1997, § 36.
ACP-EU Joint Assembly
In a resolution on the Sudan adopted in 1997, the ACP-EU Joint Assembly condemned “the obstruction of humanitarian assistance to the people of Nuba Mountains and other areas by the Government of Sudan”. 
ACP-EU, Joint Assembly, Resolution on Sudan, 20 March 1997, § 3.
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly
In a resolution on the former Yugoslavia adopted in 1994, the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly condemned the impediment of the delivery of humanitarian aid in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It considered any such impediment of humanitarian convoys by the parties to the conflict to be a “barbaric disregard for international humanitarian law”. The Assembly further demanded that “all parties to the conflict in the area of the former Yugoslavia allow the unimpeded delivery of humanitarian aid, in accordance with their own past commitments and the requirements of international humanitarian law”. 
Council of Europe, Parliamentary Assembly, Res. 1019, 25 January 1994, §§ 4 and 9(v).
European Parliament
In a resolution adopted in 1995 on human rights in Chechnya, the European Parliament insisted that “humanitarian aid dispatched to relieve the people concerned must be allowed to reach them as fast as possible without being diverted … and that there should be no obstacle to distribution by non-governmental organizations”. 
European Parliament, Resolution on human rights in Chechnya, 16 March 1995, § 4.
EU Presidency
In 1998, in a declaration on the situation in Afghanistan, the Presidency of the EU described the food blockade on central Afghanistan as “a matter of grief”. 
EU, Presidency, Declaration on behalf of the EU on the situation in Afghanistan, 16 April 1998.
OAU Assembly of Heads of State and Government
In a declaration on the situation in Angola adopted in 1993, the OAU Assembly of Heads of State and Government urged the União Nacional para Independência Total de Angola (UNITA) “not to impede or hinder the delivery of humanitarian assistance to the civilian population affected by the war”. 
OAU, Assembly of Heads of State and Government, Declaration 2 (XXIX), 28–30 June 1993, § 9.
OIC Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs
In a resolution adopted in 1992 on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the OIC Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs held the Serb leaders, those in Belgrade, as well as those in the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, responsible for the refusal to allow the delivery of assistance and supplies to populations affected by famine, which it considered constituted a serious violation of IHL. 
OIC, Conference of Ministers of Foreign Affairs, 17–18 June 1992, Res. 1/5-EX, § 15.
OSCE Permanent Council
In a resolution adopted in 1995, the Permanent Council of the OSCE called for the unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid to all groups of the civilian population affected by conflict in Chechnya. 
OSCE, Permanent Council, Resolution on Chechnya, 3 February 1995.
Western European Union Parliamentary Assembly
In 1993, the Parliamentary Assembly of the WEU debated the WEU mission to the Adriatic Sea to observe the implementation of the sanctions imposed on Serbia and Montenegro. The Rapporteur on the situation in the former Yugoslavia denounced the enormous suffering of the civilian population caused by the conflict. He particularly criticized the Bosnian Croats for blocking humanitarian convoys destined for Sarajevo. 
WEU, Parliamentary Assembly, Report and debate on the mission to the Adriatic Sea, Statement of the Rapporteur, BT-Drucksache 12/6737, 2 February 1994, p. 35.
CSCE Ministerial Council (1992)
At its meeting in Stockholm in 1992, the CSCE Ministerial Council adopted a decision on regional issues, notably the former Yugoslavia, in which it emphasized that “interference in humanitarian relief missions is an international crime for which the individuals responsible will be held personally accountable”. 
CSCE, Ministerial Council, Third Meeting, Stockholm, 14-15 December 1992, Decisions: 1. Regional Issues (Former Yugoslavia), § 18.
Inter-Parliamentary Conference (1993)
In a resolution adopted in 1993, the 90th Inter-Parliamentary Conference in Canberra expressed regret that “the international relief and protection effort during armed conflicts … is encountering serious difficulties and dangers, including … the blockade of humanitarian action, … the refusal of parties to the conflict to transport food supplies to the victims or to allow the relief organizations access to prisoners of war and imprisoned civilians”.  
90th Inter-Parliamentary Conference, Canberra, 13–18 September 1993, Respect for international humanitarian law and support for humanitarian action in armed conflicts, preamble.
No data.
No data.
Agence France Presse
In 1994, during the conflict in Afghanistan, according to Agence France Presse, the Hezb-i-Islami faction blocked all humanitarian convoys heading for enemy-controlled territory. The Hezb-i-Islami justified these actions based on allegations that previous convoys had benefited the opposing military factions. Furthermore, it insisted that it had opened three markets in areas under its control to ensure the sustenance of the civilian population. 
Agence France Presse, Press information, Islamabad, 15 February 1994.
Memorial Human Rights Center
A report by the Memorial Human Rights Center documenting the Russian Federation’s operation in the Chechen village of Samashki in April 1995 alleged that the Russian forces had impeded access by humanitarian aid personnel to the village, thereby depriving the wounded of essential medical care. The report stated:
Over the course of several days, the ICRC (which was based in Nazran) attempted to drive to the village, but Russian troops did not allow them to pass … ITAR-TASS reported that an EMERCOM convoy from Ingushetia with volunteer doctors was stopped at the checkpoint near Samashki and not allowed to pass through to the village. Médecins sans Frontières representatives were also not allowed through during that time. 
Memorial Human Rights Center, By All Available Means: the Russian Federation Ministry of Internal Affairs Operation in the Village of Samashki: April 7–8, 1995, Moscow, 1996, § 10, reprinted in Marco Sassòli and Antoine A. Bouvier, How Does Law Protect in War?, ICRC, Geneva, 1999, p. 1415.
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards
The Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights of Åbo Akademi University in Turku/Åbo, Finland in 1990, states that “deliberate deprivation of access to necessary food, drinking water and medicine” is prohibited. 
Turku Declaration of Minimum Humanitarian Standards, adopted by an expert meeting convened by the Institute for Human Rights, Åbo Akademi University, Turku/Åbo, 30 November–2 December 1990, Article 3(2)(f), IRRC, No. 282, 1991, p. 331.
Washington Post
In 1997, the Washington Post reported that rebel forces from Zaire (Democratic Republic of the Congo) were preventing humanitarian assistance from reaching tens of thousands of Rwandan refugees near the northern town of Kisangani. The report stated: “At one point, rebels requisitioned 60,000 liters of fuel from the aid agencies that was to be used to help transport the refugees. The rebels generally say the war effort warrants such actions.” 
Cindy Shiner, Rebels Prevent Relief Workers From Aiding Rwandan Refugees, Ethnic Tensions, Resentment Flaring Into Violence, The Washington Post, 23 April 1997.