Civilians' perceptions on the impartiality of Médecins sans frontières in contexts of its interventions

Abstract

This study explores civilians’ perceptions on the impartiality of the international humanitarian organization (IHO) Médecins sans Frontières (MSF). This is done through engaging participants from countries where MSF operates and has experienced different challenges in delivering humanitarian aid to civilians. The countries include the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia and Somalia. A basic interpretive approach was used to explore and interpret participants’ perceptions. Interviews were conducted with groups of participants based on their respective countries of origin. The interview questions and guide were developed using indicators of impartiality which the researcher formulated based on varying literature and definition of impartiality, independence and neutrality as the core humanitarian principles that guide the work of MSF together with many other IHOs. Participants expressed their perceptions on the impartiality of MSF through reflecting on associations they made between the IHO and parties they considered to have vested interests in humanitarian crises. These parties included Western countries, the military and persons perceived to have discriminatory and colonial intentions. Upon analysis of these perceptions, it becomes clear that MSF, as an IHO that holds itself to operate according to the humanitarian principles of independence, neutrality and impartiality, needs to reflect on how it builds its identity in order to mitigate perceptions that may have potential to hinder its ability to access and assist civilians affected by humanitarian crises.