Download Resources - English
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_1-Touchpoints
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_2- Similarities and differences CT Sanctions
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_3-Examples humanitarian safegaurds
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_4-Best practices safeguards
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_5-Risk categories and impacts
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_6-Checklist tri-sector working groups
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_7-Example donor clauses
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_8-Reviewing donor clauses_1
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_9-Go No-Go checklist
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_10-Criteria risk and impact
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_11- Risk matrix
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_12- Example CT sanctions policy
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_13- Example NSAG engagement policy
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_14-Partnership assessment checklist
- 2024-NRC-RMT-Tool_15- M&E minimum standards
Toolkit for principled humanitarian action
6. Resources
This section contains the risk library, downloadable resources and definitions of acronyms and key terms.
Tools
- Tool 1: Simplified sanctions and counterterrorism touch-point matrix
- Tool 2: ‘Cheat sheet’: differences and similarities between sanctions and counterterrorism measures
- Tool 3: Examples of humanitarian carveouts in sanctions and counterterrorism measures
- Tool 4: Checklist of best practices for humanitarian carveouts
- Tool 5: Risk categories and operational impact
- Tool 6: Checklist for establishing national tri-sector working group
- Tool 7: Example of counterterrorism / sanctions clauses in donor agreement
- Tool 8: Reviewing counterterrorism / sanctions clauses
- Tool 9: Go-No-go checklist in relation to counterterrorism / sanctions clauses
- Tool 10: Criteria’s for calculating risk impact and likelihood
- Tool 11: Example of risk matrix
- Tool 12: Example of counterterrorism policy
- Tool 13: Example of NSAG engagement policy considering counterterrorism risks
- Tool 14: Partnership assessment checklist
- Tool 15: M&E Minimum standard
Practical guide: Project cycle management and counterterrorism risks
AML: Anti-money laundering
BHA: USAID’s Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance
CTF: Counterterrorism financing
CaLP: The Cash and Learning Partnership
CVA: Cash and voucher assistance
DRC: Democratic Republic of Congo
ECOWAS: Economic Community of West African States
ERC: Emergency Relief Coordinator
EU: European Union
FATF: Financial Action Task Force
FCDO: Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
FTO: Foreign Terrorist Organization (US)
IHL: International humanitarian law
IS: Islamic State
MSF: Médecins Sans Frontières
MVTS: Money value transfer service
NGO: Non-governmental organisation
NPO: Non-profit organisation
NRC: Norwegian Refugee Council
NSAG: Non-state armed group
OCHA: UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
OFAC: US Office of Foreign Assets Control
OFSI: UK Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation
PSEA: Preventing Sexual Exploitation and Abuse
PVS: Partner Vetting System
UK: United Kingdom
UN: United Nations
UNSC: United Nations Security Council
UNSCR: United Nations Security Council resolution
US: United States
USAID: United States Agency for International Development
SCP: Sanction Compliance Program
SDGT: Specially Designated Global Terrorist (US)
SOP: Standard Operating Procedure
WASH: Water, sanitation and hygiene
Globally accepted definitions do not necessarily exist for the terms below, and humanitarian organisations use some of them differently. Those given here are for the purpose of this toolkit only.
Access — Humanitarian organisations’ ability to reach affected populations and conduct humanitarian operations, and the ability of affected populations to access assistance.
Aid diversion – Any event, including fraud, corruption, bribery, theft, money laundering and other misuse of funds, that prevents funds being directed to its intended recipients. Anti-aid diversion policies and practices refer to measures taken to ensure that humanitarian assistance reaches the intended beneficiaries.
Chilling effect - The impact of laws or measures that do not actually prohibit behaviour, but whose effect de facto inhibits or discourages lawful activities. Sanctions and counterterrorism measures can have a chilling effect. These measures are often complicated to navigate, which can lead stakeholders, including humanitarian organisations or the private sector, to self-censor and refrain from permissible activities from fear of violating the restrictions.
Code of conduct — A set of principles adopted by an organisation designed to maintain standards of behaviour.
Counterterrorism measures — International, regional, national laws and policies, or donor provisions related to counterterrorism. They include sanctions adopted for counterterrorism purposes as well as criminal laws.
Derisking – When the private sector or financial institutions terminate or restrict financial services to avoid rather than manage risk. Bank derisking is driven by risk aversion, concerns about reputation and profitability, and requirements to comply with sanctions, anti-money laundering (AML) and terrorism financing obligations.
Designated person or entity – A person or entity such as an armed group or company against which targeted sanctions have been imposed.
Dual use items - Goods, software or technology that can be used for both civilian and military applications.
Due diligence — The implementation of organisational policies, controls and processes designed to identify and assess the impact of activities and relationships on humanitarian work throughout the project cycle.
Fraud — A deception practised to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
Humanitarian safeguard or carve-out – Non-legal terms that refer to the various approaches to exclude activities or organisations from restrictions that legal provisions impose to protect principled humanitarian action. Confusingly, international entities such as the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) and individual countries do not use the terms consistently. More important than the terminology, however, is understanding how different safeguards operate and what, if anything, international humanitarian organisations must do to benefit from them.
As far as sanctions are concerned, there are two principal approaches:
- Excluding activities and/or stakeholders from the prohibitions altogether. This type of safeguard applies automatically, and humanitarian organisations do not have to do anything to benefit from it. We call these “exemptions” in this toolkit, but they are also referred to in other ways, such as “general licenses” in the United States (US).
- Requiring humanitarian organisations to apply to be excluded from prohibitions. We call these “derogations”, but in the US they are referred to as “specific licenses” and in the United Kingdom (UK) as “Treasury licences”.
As far as criminal counterterrorism measures are concerned, safeguards usually take the form of “exceptions” to the offences.
Incidental benefits – This term is often used in relation to humanitarian exemptions. In this context, ‘’incidental benefits’’ refers to payments, transactions or transfer of resources that are necessary to conduct humanitarian activities but may benefit designated entities. These typically include payment of taxes to a designated group, or the use of a supplier owned by a designated individual for humanitarian activities. Humanitarian exemptions in sanctions authorise such transactions if they meet certain criteria. However, these payments may still be forbidden under other autonomous sanctions that do not have a similar exemption, or under the counterterrorism legislation of a host or donor country.
Monitoring — The continuous and systematic oversight of the implementation of an activity to measure the achievement of objectives using allocated funds.
Overcompliance - When humanitarian organisations, banks or private sector entities operate in a way that is more restrictive than sanctions provisions or counterterrorism measures demand.
Proscribed terrorist group - A group that has been listed as ‘terrorist’ by a country for the purpose of its domestic criminal counterterrorism law. It is also possible for the group to be simultaneously designated under sanctions.
Residual risk – The risk that remains after efforts to manage or mitigate it.
Risk – The effect of uncertainty on an organisation’s objectives.
Risk management —The processes involved in identifying, assessing and mitigating risks, including actions to anticipate or respond to them, and monitoring and reviewing progress.
Risk transfer – The shifting of risk from one entity to another. Risk transfer can occur between donors and humanitarian organisations, and between international organisations and local implementing partners.
Restrictive measures – The expression the EU uses to refer to sanctions.
Sanctions — Foreign policy measures that may be adopted internationally, or by regional organisations and/or individual countries. They are intended to influence the behaviour of other countries, groups, or individuals without recourse to armed force. They can include different types of restrictions, including financial sanctions, prohibitions on the purchase of commodities or the import of certain goods, and travel restrictions for designated individuals.
Screening — Process by which an organisation conducts checks to ensure that anyone who receives a payment or a resource, including staff, prospective staff, contractors, and staff of partner organisations, does not appear on lists of individuals or entities designated under sanctions or proscribed groups under counterterrorism measures.
Vetting – Screening and vetting are often used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing. Humanitarian organisations carry out screening, while vetting requires them to provide information on individuals and entities to a donor, which carries out their own checks. Vetting is also sometimes used more broadly to refer to due diligence measures.
Actions Contre la Faim, Médecins du Monde, Handicap International, 2023
‘Data collection guidelines on the impact of sanctions and counterterrorism measures’
The Carter Center, 2023
‘Effectiveness of Humanitarian Exceptions to Sanctions: Lessons from the Syria Earthquake’
The Cash Learning Partnership (CaLP), 2019
‘Cash and Voucher Assistance and Risk in Financial Management and Compliance Briefing Note’
Charity and Security Network, 2017
‘Financial Access for US Non-Profits'
https://www.charityandsecurity.org/system/files/FinancialAccessFullReport_2.21%20(2).pdf
Chatham House, 2017
‘Recommendations for Reducing Tensions in the Interplay Between Sanctions, Counterterrorism Measures and Humanitarian Action’
Chatham House, 2019
‘IHL and the humanitarian impact of counterterrorism measures and sanctions. Unintended ill effects of well-intended measures ‘
Christian Aid, 2019
‘The Grand Bargain and the issue of Risk Management’
https://www.grandbargain4ngos.org/upload/Grand_Bargain-_Risk_workshop_5d160710dd4ef.pdf
European Banking Authority, 2024
‘The EBAs Work on Derisking’ (including links to guidelines and research)
European Center for Not-for-Profit Law, 2022
‘Navigating access to financial services for CSOs’
https://ecnl.org/publications/navigating-access-financial-services-csos
FATF, 2023
‘Best Practices on Combating the Abuse of Non-Profit Organisations’
FATF, 2023
‘Protecting non-profits from abuse for terrorist financing through the risk-based implementation of revised FATF Recommendation 8’
FATF, 2023
‘The FATF Recommendations,’
https://www.fatf-gafi.org/en/publications/Fatfrecommendations/Fatf-recommendations.html
Geneva Call, 2016
‘In their words: Perceptions of armed non-state actors on humanitarian action’
https://www.genevacall.org/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2016/09/WHS_Report_2016_web.pdf
Global NPO Coalition on Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Report Collection
http://fatfplatform.org/reports-3/
Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi), and Humanitarian Outcomes, 2016
‘The effects of insecurity on humanitarian coverage’
https://www.gppi.net/media/SAVE__2016__The_effects_of_insecurity_on_humanitarian_coverage.pdf
Harvard Law School Program on International law and Armed Conflict (HLS PILAC), 2024
‘Resolution 2664 (2022) and Counterterrorism Measures: An Analytical Frame for States’
https://pilac.law.harvard.edu/res-2664-and-counterterrorism-measures
Harvard Law School Program on International Law and Armed Conflict, 2023
‘An Interpretive Note for U.N. Member States on Security Council Resolution 2664 (2022)’
https://pilac.law.harvard.edu/resolution-2664
Harvard Law School Program on International law and Armed Conflict (HLS PILAC), 2021
‘Taking into Account the Potential Effects of Counterterrorism Measures on Humanitarian and Medical Activities’
https://pilac.law.harvard.edu/take-into-account-report-web-version
Harvard Law School Program on International law and Armed Conflict (HLS PILAC), 2017
‘Pilot empirical survey study on the impact of counterterrorism measures on humanitarian action’
http://blogs.harvard.edu/pilac/files/2017/03/Pilot-Empirical-Survey-Study-2017.pdf
Harvard Law School Program on International law and Armed Conflict (HLS PILAC), 2016
‘Understanding humanitarian exemptions: U.N Security Council Sanctions and Principled Humanitarian Action’
http://blogs.harvard.edu/pilac/files/2016/04/Understanding_Humanitarian_Exemptions_April_2016.pdf
Humanitarian Outcomes, 2016
‘What It Takes: Principled pragmatism to enable access and quality humanitarian aid in insecure environment’
Humanitarian Outcomes, ODI and Humanitarian Practice Network (HPN), 2016
‘Tug of War: Ethical decision-making to enable humanitarian access in high-risk environments’
https://odihpn.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/NP80-web-string.pdf
Humanitarian Outcomes, and InterAction, 2016
‘NGO Risk Management: Principles and Promising Practice’
https://www.humanitarianoutcomes.org/sites/default/files/publications/ngo-risk_handbook.pdf
Humanitarian Outcomes (2014-2016)
‘Secure Access in Volatile Environments’
https://www.humanitarianoutcomes.org/projects/save
Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI), 2018
‘Counterterrorism, bank de-risking and humanitarian response: a path forward’
https://www.odi.org/publications/11177-impact-bank-de-risking-humanitarian-response-syrian-crisis
Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI), 2013
‘Paradoxes of presence: Risk management and aid culture in challenging environments’
http://www.bristol.ac.uk/media-library/sites/global-insecurities/migrated/documents/paradoxes.pdf
Humanitarian Policy Group (HPG) and Overseas Development Institute (ODI), 2018
‘The impact of bank de-risking on the humanitarian response to the Syrian crisis’
https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/resource-documents/12376.pdf
Humanitarian Policy and Conflict Research (HPCR), 2011 ‘Humanitarian Action under Scrutiny: Criminalizing Humanitarian Engagement’
Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), 2021
‘IASC Guidance on the Impact of Sanctions and Counterterrorism Measures on Humanitarian Operations’
Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), 2023
IASC Policy Paper, ‘Considerations on Screening/Vetting of Persons in Need of Humanitarian Assistance in Counterterrorism and Sanctions Contexts’
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), 2019
‘International Humanitarian Law and the Challenges of Contemporary Armed Conflicts – Recommitting to Protection in Armed Conflict’
InterAction, and Humanitarian Outcomes, 2019
‘NGOs & Risk: Managing Uncertainty in Local-International Partnerships’
https://www.interaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Risk-Global-Study.pdf
International Council of Voluntary Agencies (ICVA), 2020
‘Risk and Humanitarian Culture: An ICVA Briefing Paper’
InterAction, 2019
‘Resources on NGO Risk Management’
https://www.interaction.org/topics/ngo-risk-management/
International Peace Institute, 2023 ‘Safeguarding Humanitarian Action in UN Sanctions and Counterterrorism Regimes: The Impact and Implementation of Resolution 2664’
International Review of the Red Cross, 2022
‘Counterterrorism, sanctions and war’
https://international-review.icrc.org/reviews/irrc-no-916-917-counterterrorism-sanctions-and-war
International Review of the Red Cross, Emma O’Leary, 2022
‘Politics and principles: The impact of counterterrorism measures and sanctions on principled humanitarian action’
Médecins Sans Frontières, 2014
‘Where is everyone? Responding to emergencies in the most difficult places’
https://www.msf.org/sites/msf.org/files/msf-whereiseveryone_-def-lr_-_july.pdf
Médecins Sans Frontières, 2017
‘Perilous terrain. Humanitarian action at risk in Mali’
https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/Case-Study-03-Mali-ALTA_0.pdf
Médecins Sans Frontières, 2018
‘Bridging the Emergency Gap’
https://arhp.msf.es/sites/default/files/BRIDGING-THE-EMERGENCY-GAP-FULL-REPORT.pdf
The New Humanitarian, 2019
‘The creeping criminalisation of humanitarian aid’
https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2019/06/07/creeping-criminalisation-humanitarian-aid
NRC, 2018
‘Principles under Pressure: the impact of counterterrorism measures and preventing/countering violent extremism on principled humanitarian action’
NRC and OCHA, 2017
‘Presence and Proximity - To Stay and Deliver, Five Years On’
https://www.nrc.no/presence-and-proximity-to-stay-and-deliver-five-years-on
NRC, 2015
‘Risk Management Toolkit: In relation to counterterrorism measures’
https://www.nrc.no/resources/reports/nrc-risk-management-toolkit-2015/
NRC, 2022
‘Dialogue Series on Solutions to Bank Derisking’
- Session 1: Safeguarding humanitarian banking channels: how, why and by whom?
- Session 2: Use of Money or Value Transfer Services by Non-Governmental Organisations
- Session 3: Mitigating financial sector derisking through innovation: The role of digital technologies in humanitarian funds transfers
- Session 4: The developing role of national tri-sector groups in addressing financial sector derisking
https://www.protecthumanitarianspace.com/topics/bank-derisking
https://www.nrc.no/resources/reports/safeguarding-humanitarian-banking/
NRC and OCHA, 2013
‘Study of the Impact of Donor Counterterrorism Measures on Principled Humanitarian Action’
https://www.unocha.org/sites/unocha/files/CounterTerrorism_Study_Full_Report.pdf
NRC, 2021
‘Life and Death: NGO access to financial services in Afghanistan’
https://www.nrc.no/resources/reports/life-and-death-ngo-access-to-financial-services-in-afghanistan
NRC & The Geneva Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies (IHEID) 2022
‘Online bibliography, comprising reports, studies, and guidance on sanctions and their intersection with humanitarian action’
https://airtable.com/appFXfI6zIOB24Tic/shrPpFAOpRCReEtcS
OCHA, 2011
‘To Stay and Deliver’
https://www.unocha.org/sites/unocha/files/Stay_and_Deliver.pdf
OHCHR, Ben Saul, 2024
A/HRC/55/48: ‘Vision and priorities - Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism’
U4 Anti-Corruption, and Transparency International, 2019
‘Managing corruption challenges in humanitarian settings’
https://www.u4.no/publications/managing-corruption-challenges-in-humanitarian-settings.pdf
VOICE, 2021
‘Adding to the evidence: The impacts of sanctions and restrictive meausres on humanitarian action’
Sample of official sanction guidance
The European Commission has issued various guidance materials on EU sanctions, which can be found on their general information page. This includes recent guidance on the provision of humanitarian aid in compliance with EU restrictive measures, and guidance on specific countries and frequently asked questions (FAQs) on specific sanctions regimes and links to the EU-level contact point for humanitarian aid in environments subject to EU sanctions. It has also created an online EU sanctions map, which sets out all of the measures the bloc has adopted and provides links to the legal instruments. The European Commission sanctions page has general guidance about restrictive measures and sanctions.
In the United States, The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is part of the US Department of the Treasury, administers and enforces US financial sanctions. It has issued general and country-specific guidance for humanitarian organisations. It also publishes FAQs on various sanctions regimes, and operates a compliance hotline that prioritises requests related to humanitarian operations.
The United Kingdom’s Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI), which is part of the UK Treasury, has issued similar guidance, including specific guidance for charities and NGOs, country-specific guidance and a limited number of FAQs. In addition, the UK Home Office has issued guidance on Operating within counterterrorism legislation for organisations or individuals working in a region where proscribed organisations operate.
An overview of the United Nations sanctions can be found on the UN Sanctions App and there is a fact sheet providing an overview of the UN sanctions and the role of the related sanctions committees.