The IASC Protection Policy is applicable in all settings where there are IASC humanitarian coordination structures, but IASC member organizations may also find it relevant in other settings, including those transitioning out of humanitarian crises. The policy requires HCTs to ensure this approach is at the center of their collective humanitarian response mandating that HCTs – Humanitarian Coordinators (HC) and heads of HCT member organizations – work together to understand and seek to prevent, mitigate or end protection risks, including violations of international humanitarian and human rights law, that people affected by conflict or disaster face.
Centrality of Protection Timeline
Failure to Prevent Genocide
The failure of the international community to prevent genocide in Rwanda (1994) and the former Yugoslavia (1995) represented a system-wide failure to protect civilians from mass atrocity crimes and prompted rethinking of the role and responsibility of the UN system, and the nature of UN Peacekeeping mandates.
Responsibility to Protect
The fallout from Rwanda and Srebrenica also catalyzed the debate on the rights and responsibilities of States to intervene to prevent mass atrocity crimes, culminating in a global norm of the Responsibility to Protect – first articulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty and unanimously endorsed in the World Summit Outcome Document.
Failure to Protect Civilians in Sri Lanka
Some advances were made, but widespread civilian harm persisted. In 2012, the Report of the Secretary General’s Internal Review Panel on UN Actions in Sri Lanka identified, once again, a “grave failure of the UN to adequately respond to early warngings and to the evolving situation…to the detriment of hundreds of thousands of civilians and in contradiction with the principles and responsiblities of the US.” The report indicated that the UN System had – among other things – “lacked an adequate and shared sense of responsibility for human rights violations.”
IASC Principal’s Statement on CoP
In December 2013, the IASC Principals released a statement on the Centrality of Protection in Humanitarian Action affirming that “protection of all persons affected and at risk must inform humanitarian decision-making and response, including engagement with States and non-State parties to conflict. It must be central to our preparedness efforts, as part of immediate and life-saving activities, and throughout the duration of humanitarian response and beyond.”
IASC Protection Policy
In 2016, the Principal’s Statement on CoP was followed by the IASC Policy on Protection in Humanitarian Action. Focusing on the prevention and mitigation of violence, coercion, abuse and deprivation, the policy “emphasizes an IASC commitment to prioritize protection and contribute to collective protection outcomes, including through the development of an HCT protection strategy to address the most critical and urgent risks and violations. It also underlines the need to implement this commitment in all aspects of humanitarian action and across the Humanitarian Programme Cycle (HPC).”
Independent Review
Five years later, in 2021 an independent review was commissioned to revisit the implementation of the IASC Protection Policy and identify barriers. The Review found that “the ambition and intent of the Policy have not been met, and there is still a significant gap between policy and practice” highlighting six key areas for attention – conceptual clarity; leadership and accountability; collective responsibility; a simplification of the protection architecture; approaching protection as an outcome; and an inclusive approach to protection strategies.
Community of Practice
The IASC Task Force on the Centrality of Protection was formed in 2022 to develop an Action Plan operationalizing the recommendations made in the Review. The Action Plan was adopted by the IASC Principals in November 2023, and the Community of Practice on the Centrality of Protection – comprised of the Task Force membership – was established in July 2024, to maintain momentum by the Task Force, and drive forward the work of implementing the Action Plan.
Key CoP Documents Expand All
The IASC Benchmarks for Humanitarian Country Team Collective Implementation of the Policy on Protection in Humanitarian Action (Benchmarks) were developed by the Centrality of Protection Taskforce as an actionable and easy-to-use tool to support Humanitarian Coordinators (HCs) and Humanitarian Country Teams (HCTs). The Benchmarks lay out what actions should be taken by the HCT, who is responsible, and how the action will be verified to successfully implement the Centrality of Protection approach at the country level. The three benchmarks – analysis and prioritization, response planning and implementation, and monitoring, learning and evaluation – are broken down into concrete actions and discrete outputs to facilitate greater uptake of the Policy on Protection. Crucially, the verification component of the Benchmarks provides accountability measures for the HC and HCTs that allow both HCT members and other actors to confirm compliance with the Policy.
IASC BenchmarksThe IASC Policy on Protection in Humanitarian Action: an Aide-Memoire (Aide-Memoire) is intended to clarify and reinforce the key elements of the IASC Policy on Protection in Humanitarian Action of 2016 (IASC Protection Policy). It is aimed at Humanitarian Coordinators and Humanitarian Country Teams (HCTs) to support their implementation of the Policy at country level and was developed in consultation with field practitioners. It should be read in conjunction with both the IASC Protection Policy and the Benchmarks for HCT Collective Implementation of the IASC Policy on Protection in Humanitarian Action (the IASC Protection Benchmarks). The Aide-Memoire provides additional context and background information required for a comprehensive understanding the Protection Benchmarks. It highlights the responsibilities of HCTs to reduce protection risks in complement to or as part of the three benchmarks, including engaging local and non-humanitarian actors and measurement of outcomes. The document also answers common questions of field practitioners such as how non-protection clusters can contribute and what to do if a response has little or no demonstrable impact.
IASC Aide-Memoire