Volume 18, Issue 3 (8-2026)
jorar 2026, 18(3): 127-139 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Zariei A, Raisi Dezaki L, Pourkhaghan Shahrezaei Z. Legal Challenges to Good Governance in the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies and Their Implications for Humanitarian Assistance. jorar 2026; 18 (3) :127-139
URL: http://jorar.ir/article-1-1073-en.html
URL: http://jorar.ir/article-1-1073-en.html
Professor, Department of Int Law, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
Abstract: (17 Views)
INTRODUCTION:The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) operates within a complex legal and institutional environment shaped by its decentralized structure, diverse membership, funding arrangements, and relationships with States and other Movement components. These characteristics may create challenges to transparency, accountability, institutional independence, coordination, and dispute resolution. This study aimed to identify the main legal and institutional challenges to good governance within the IFRC and examine their implications for humanitarian assistance.
METHODS: This qualitative study employed directed qualitative content analysis of 47 IFRC foundational, evaluation, audit, and policy documents published during 1975–2025, supplemented by two case studies: the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis was guided by predefined legal and governance criteria derived from relevant IFRC statutory, governance, integrity, and audit documents. A total of 234 initial codes were grouped into 12 subcategories and five overarching categories. An inter-coder agreement of 87% was achieved.
RESULTS: Five major themes were identified: 1) transparency and accountability challenges related to institutional independence, oversight, and distributed responsibilities; 2) earmarked funding and external contributions that may constrain operational flexibility; 3) coordination and role-delineation challenges within the Movement; 4) fragmented dispute-resolution mechanisms across legal and contractual arrangements; and 5) operational legal challenges involving relief cargo, protection of humanitarian personnel, and jurisdiction, privileges, and immunities. The case studies illustrated how these challenges may affect coordination, accountability, operational flexibility, and continuity of humanitarian assistance.
CONCLUSION: Strengthening IFRC legal and governance mechanisms is important for maintaining legitimacy, accountability, and operational effectiveness while preserving the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The study recommends standardized dispute-resolution provisions in the short term, funding diversification and minimum governance standards in the medium term, and a specialized Movement dispute-resolution mechanism in the long term.
METHODS: This qualitative study employed directed qualitative content analysis of 47 IFRC foundational, evaluation, audit, and policy documents published during 1975–2025, supplemented by two case studies: the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami and the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis was guided by predefined legal and governance criteria derived from relevant IFRC statutory, governance, integrity, and audit documents. A total of 234 initial codes were grouped into 12 subcategories and five overarching categories. An inter-coder agreement of 87% was achieved.
RESULTS: Five major themes were identified: 1) transparency and accountability challenges related to institutional independence, oversight, and distributed responsibilities; 2) earmarked funding and external contributions that may constrain operational flexibility; 3) coordination and role-delineation challenges within the Movement; 4) fragmented dispute-resolution mechanisms across legal and contractual arrangements; and 5) operational legal challenges involving relief cargo, protection of humanitarian personnel, and jurisdiction, privileges, and immunities. The case studies illustrated how these challenges may affect coordination, accountability, operational flexibility, and continuity of humanitarian assistance.
CONCLUSION: Strengthening IFRC legal and governance mechanisms is important for maintaining legitimacy, accountability, and operational effectiveness while preserving the Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. The study recommends standardized dispute-resolution provisions in the short term, funding diversification and minimum governance standards in the medium term, and a specialized Movement dispute-resolution mechanism in the long term.
Keywords: Good Governance, IFRC, Humanitarian Assistance, Accountability, Dispute Resolution, Humanitarian Organizations, Earmarked Funding.
Article Type: Research article |
Subject:
Humanitarian laws
References
1. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement: Ethics and Tools for Humanitarian Action. Geneva: IFRC.
2. Bond, Buzzacott. Governance: A Guide for International NGOs [Internet]. London: Bond; 2022. Available from: https://B2n.ir/pm5253
3. International Committee of the Red Cross. The Fundamental Principles of the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement [Internet]. Geneva: ICRC; 2020. Available from: https://B2n.ir/yf6302
4. Slim H. Humanitarian Ethics: A Guide to the Morality of Aid in War and Disaster. London: Hurst & Company; 2015.
5. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Framework for Ethics, Integrity and Conduct. Geneva: IFRC; 2021.
6. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Resolutions of the 34th International Conference of the Red Cross and Red Crescent [Internet]. Geneva: IFRC; 2024. Available from: B2n.ir/np3947
7. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Rules of Procedure of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Rev ed. Adopted by the 24th Session of the General Assembly; Geneva; 2024. Rule 3.3.
8. Fisher D. Law and Legal Issues in International Disaster Response: A Desk Study. Geneva: International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies; 2007.
9. Telford J, Cosgrave J. Joint Evaluation of the International Response to the Indian Ocean Tsunami: Synthesis Report. London: Tsunami Evaluation Coalition; 2006.
10. Red Cross EU Office. Protecting the humanitarian space to access and support migrants [Internet]. Brussels: Red Cross EU Office; [2021 Mar 3]. Available from: B2n.ir/kt2985
11. International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. Annual Report 2021 [Internet]. Geneva: IFRC; 2022 Jul 15. Available from: https://B2n.ir/up6119
12. DuBois M, Healy S. Imperfect relief: challenges to the impartiality and identity of humanitarian action. Int Rev Red Cross. 2024;106(925):90-99. Wiley Online Library [DOI:10.1017/S181638312 4000092]
13. Abeytia A, Brito Ruiz E, Ojo JS, Alloosh T. Do no harm: the role of humanitarian aid and neutrality in protracting civil wars. Civil Wars. 2023;25(2-3):341-366. [DOI:10.1080/13698249.2023.2253101]
14. Knox Clarke P. The State of the Humanitarian System 2018 [Internet]. London: ALNAP/ODI; 2018. Available from: Full report – The State of the Humanitarian System 2018
15. Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today.2004;24(2):105-112. [DOI:10.1016/j.nedt. 2003.10.001]
16. United Nations Development Programme. Governance for sustainable human development: a UNDP policy document [Internet]. New York: UNDP; [1997 Jan]. Available from: UN Digital Library–Governance for Sustainable Human Development
17. International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement. Seville Agreement 2.0: Movement Coordination for Collective Impact Agreement [Internet]. Geneva: IFRC; 2022. Available from: IFRC – Seville Agreement 2.0
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
