Following the adoption of a standing humanitarian exemption by the UN Security Council in 2022 (Resolution 2664), many states have taken steps to transpose this safeguard into national legislation—sometimes extending it to their autonomous sanctions regimes. However, divergences have emerged: states often introduce new language or restrictive conditions, while humanitarian safeguard clauses in counterterrorism legislation remain fragmented and inconsistent across jurisdictions. As a result, a variety of safeguard models now coexist both within and across legal systems. This creates a complex legal environment for humanitarian actors and private sector entities alike. The lack of harmonisation also limits the effectiveness of these safeguards in practice and risks undermining the protection of humanitarian action.
To address these challenges, this study analyses and compares models of humanitarian safeguard clauses in both sanctions and counterterrorism frameworks at the international and domestic levels. It draws on best practices to provide recommendations for states seeking to adopt or strengthen legal measures to protect humanitarian activities. The study covers major sanctions jurisdictions—including the United Nations (UN), United States (US), European Union (EU), United Kingdom (UK), and others—up to December 2024, as well as relevant legislation from donor and host states that have incorporated humanitarian safeguards.
