Resolutions to ICM 2001 (2) Underlag till styrelsemöte 1-2 december 2000

Till: Styrelsen
Från: Amnestyfonden
Datum: 1 december 2000


Resolution to ICM 2001

Fundraising Guidelines-Relief

The International Council

recognising the Fundraising Guidelines that were adopted by Decision 47 of the 1999 ICM;

noting that the revised Fundraising Guidelines accept government funding for relief purposes;

noting that no written analysis of the relief-related consequences of this decision was carried out prior to ICM 1999;

REQUESTS that the implementation of the Fundraising Guidelines adopted by ICM 1999 in the section regarding relief (III.E.) be suspended until the issue of government funding has been addressed and analysed from a relief perspective;

REQUESTS the IEC to review in this context the advisability of accepting national government grants for relief purposes;

ASKS the IEC to ensure that an analysis of the involvement of government funding in relief work be carried out in time for the ICM 2003.


Explanatory Note:
The 1999 Decision
The Revised Proposed Guidelines for the Acceptance of Funds and Fundraising by Amnesty International state that contributions from governments for relief may be accepted, but not if targeted for specific individuals or for a refugee from a specific country . The Resolution was formally put to the ICM by the IEC. The resolution was put forward as a financial resolution, and the relief implications of the revised guidelines were not adequately analysed or discussed. We believe that this analysis should have been carried out before the resolution was put to the 1999 ICM.

To date no section, following an inquiry from the Mandate and Research Programme, has reported to the IS that they have applied for, or recieved, government funding for relief. Given the background outlined above we believe that a comprehensive study should be carried out taking into account the particular relief-related implications of the introduction of government funding.





Resolution to ICM 2001

Relief review

The International Council

recalling Decision 15 of the 1993 ICM (see below)

noting that the relief review that was decided by the 1993 ICM has still not been carried out and is not included in the Troia Action Plan

taking into account that past major mandate amendments (eg. NGE-issues) and current policy discussions affecting Amnesty´s overall work (eg. naming the names, non-state actors) have and will have implications for relief policies as well

taking further into account the work on Human Rights Defenders (HRD) and the need to clarify the relationship between relief and work on HRD

DECIDES that a thorough review and revision be carried out of the Relief Policies and Procedures

REQUEST that this review be carried out in close cooperation with section relief officers and that the new guidelines be completed and distributed to sections in time for the 2003 ICM


Explanatory note:
Decision 51 of the 1991 ICM called for a thorough review and revision of AI´s relief policies and procedures. A review was accordingly carried out in 1992-93, leading to the recommendations made by the intersectional meeting in Gripsholm, Sweden, in 1993. The recommendations put forward by the meeting to the 1993 ICM were the following:

-generally humanitarian relief for general needs should continue to be limited to victims in the POC
category

-expand the preventive use and other aspects of AI relief for purposes which address certain
specific forms of HR violations whether or not the victims fall into the POC category, such as the
provision of legal aid in order to prevent people becoming victims of torture, disappearance or
EJE, and medical relief to people injured in EJE attempts and to victims of prolonged
"disappearance" who "reappear" and who require medical treatment as a result of ill-treatment"

-AI´s relief policy relating to victims of NGE abuses should in principle mirror the policy towards
victims of violations by governments, but in normal circumstances AI would expect governments
to respond to the needs of victims of NGE abuses"

Decision 15 of ICM 1993 reads as follows:

recalling Decision 51 of the 1991 ICM which called for a thorough review and revision of AI's relief policies and procedures (FIN 52/03/86, adopted by Decision 7 of the 1985 ICM),

recalling also that relief, however important, is not a core objective of AI,

taking account of the need to adjust the guidelines dealing with AI's relief procedures to reflect practice arising from organizational changes since 1985,

noting the review which was accordingly carried out in 1992-3, leading to the recommendations made by the intersection meeting convened by the Swedish and Swiss Sections (Gripsholm, Sweden, 19-21 February 1993),

WELCOMES the recommendations put forward by that meeting, in particular:

- that generally "humanitarian" relief for general needs should continue to be limited to victims in
the "POC category", but in exceptionally compelling cases where there is no possibility that
relief will be seen as supporting violence, AI's relief policy should allow relief to be given to
dependants of non-"POC-type" victims of "disappearance" and EJE;

- while maintaining this "humanitarian" aspect of AI's relief program, also to expand the
preventive use and other aspects of AI relief for purposes which address certain specific forms
of human rights violations whether or not the victims fall in the "POC category", such as by the
provision of legal aid in order to prevent people becoming victims of torture, "disappearance" or
EJE, and medical relief to people injured in EJE attempts and to victims of prolonged
"disappearance" who "reappear" and who require medical treatment as a result of ill-treatment;

- that AI's relief policy relating to victims of NGE abuses should in principle mirror the policy
towards victims of violations by governments, but in normal circumstances AI would expect
governments to respond to the needs of victims of NGE abuses.

INSTRUCTS the IEC to issue new guidelines on AI's relief policies and procedures in accordance with these recommendations of that meeting and taking into account other recommendations of that meeting;

NOTES that on issuance of those guidelines all previous policies and procedures on relief will be superseded;

REQUESTS the IEC in the future to consider possibilities for:

- establishing a non-relief budget line for developing AI work in providing financial assistance in
instances which would have a strategic advantage in furthering AI's aims but which cannot
properly be treated as part of AI's relief program (for example, provision of legal aid in death
penalty test cases, as set out in 1991 ICM Decision 52);

- making some provision in AI's general budget for contributing towards those areas of relief
which have a major preventive element;

ASKS the IEC to ensure that a review of the practice of certain aspects of the new elements of relief policy, identified in the recommendations of the meeting, be carried out in time for the 1997 ICM.
(Arising from Resolution A71)


Follow-up on decision 15:

(1) Guidelines 1995
New guidelines on policies and procedures for AI´s relief work were issued through the adoption of the revised Guidelines for AI relief work (FIN50/01/95).

(2) Relief review
The following section is from the current Guidelines for AI relief work (FIN 50/01/95):

Review of new areas of relief policy
Following the recommendations of the 1993 relief review, Decision 15 of the 1993 ICM asked the IEC to ensure that the implementation of certain new elements of relief policy are reviewed after the policy has been in practice for three years, in time for the 1997 ICM (see §2: B2/p1.2;
comment §1bii) and in §5a) of International Review of relief policies and procedures: Conclusions and Recommendations (FIN 50/01/93). However, as the new policy will not have been in operation for three years by the 1997 ICM, a new deadline for the review will be decided by the IEC.

Decision 29 of ICM 1997 reads as follows:

The International Council
recalling Decision 15 of the 1993 ICM, which requested the IEC to:

(a) issue new guidelines on policies and procedures for AI´s relief work
(b) consider establishing a budget line for developing AI work in providing finincial assistance in instances which would have a strategic advantage in furtering AI´s aims, but which cannot properly be treated as part of AI´s relief program
(c) consider making some provisions in AI´s general budget for contributing towards those areas of relief which have a major preventive element
(d) ensure that a review of the practice of certain aspects of the new elements of releif policy be carried out in time for the 1997 ICM

noting the new relief guidelines and procedures issued in August 1995:

welcoming the increased attention given in recent years to relief initiatives with a major preventive component;

aware of the present financial constraints

DECIDES that initiatives on behalf of human rights defenders with a predominant preventive element be funded through AI´s relief budget (see explanatory note B);

REQUESTS the IEC to

a) Evaluate how the guidelines from 1995 have been implemented
b) Undertake a study on how other forms of assistance such as financial assistance with a less
preventive element to human rights defenders (explanatory note d of Resolution B5.2) can be
increased and financed outside the relief budget.

REQUESTS the IEC to report on the implementation of this Decision to the 1999 ICM.


Decision 29 of the 1997 ICM reads as follows:

The International Council

recalling Decision 15 of the 1993 ICM, which requested the IEC to:
(a) issue new guidelines on policies and procedures for AI’s relief work
(b) consider establishing a budget line for developing AI work in providing financial assistance in instances which would have a strategic advantage in furthering AI’s aims, but which cannot properly be treated as part of AI’s relief program
(c) consider making some provision in AI’s general budget for contributing towards those areas of relief which have a major preventive element
(d) ensure that a review of the practice of certain aspects of the new elements of relief policy be carried out in time for the 1997 ICM

noting the new relief guidelines and procedures issued in August 1995;

welcoming the increased attention given in recent years to relief initiatives with a major preventive component;

aware of the present financial constraints

REQUESTS the IEC to

a) Evaluate how the guidelines from 1995 have been implemented
b) Undertake a study on how other forms of assistance such as financial assisitance with a less preventive element to human rights defenders and financial support for standard-setting and the support of human rights defenders can be increased and financed outside the relief budget.

REQUESTS the IEC to report on the implementation of this Decision to the 1999 ICM.

(Arising from Resolution B5.2)