A/HRC/37/61 the food market and the destruction of livelihoods, thus making food-insecure populations even more susceptible to suffering future crises. 60 The occurrence of a disaster usually leads to an emergency response that is ill-suited to addressing root causes or long-term consequences. In fact, emergency responses are part of what may be referred to as the “disaster cycle”.61 62. Due to the absence of binding legal mechanisms, discrepancies among various interpretations and the increased number of disaster situations worldwide, the International Law Commission has produced 21 draft articles on subjects ranging from the role of the affected State in coordinating an international disaster response to the recognition of human rights in the context of a natural disaster. The Commission’s 2016 draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters explicitly adopt a rights-based approach, including the affirmation of human dignity, to address vulnerability in emergencies. 62 The Commission’s Special Rapporteur on the topic commented on the debate within the humanitarian community, noting that the “rights-based” and more traditional “needs-based” approaches were not necessarily mutually exclusive, but complementary. 63 Moreover, while he recognizes the primary responsibility of the disaster-affected State, he takes a fresh approach by suggesting that human rights responsibilities might be on the verge of being “deterritorialized” by declaring and establishing an international duty of cooperation. 64 The draft articles clearly remind the international community of the responsibilities of external actors towards disaster-affected people. At the same time, the draft articles primarily cover the rights and obligations of States, as opposed to non-State actors,65 while they invoke the phrase “international community” to describe the assemblage of relevant actors: third States, intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that are empowered to offer humanitarian assistance. 66 63. Unlike the International Law Commission’s draft articles, the dominant view for international community disaster relief is still based on voluntarism and assumes that disaster-affected people remain dependent on the vagaries of altruism, which is often unreliable, politically partisan, and arbitrary.67 64. It is notable that the Human Rights Council Advisory Committee report (A/HRC/28/76) does not refer to the work of the International Law Commission on the protection of persons in the event of disasters, nor to the work on the international legal obligations of States and non-State actors undertaken by the Commission’s Special Rapporteur. For a truly coordinated approach within the United Nations regarding human rights norms, it is essential to achieve cross-fertilization of concepts, research and activities.68 2. The human rights system 65. Various United Nations Charter-based and treaty-based mechanisms, as well as institutional arrangements and procedures such as the International Law Commission, the Human Rights Council and its universal periodic review process, the thematic mandates 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 12 FAO, “The right to adequate food in emergency programmes” (Rome, 2014), p. 3. Daniel A. Farber, “International law and the disaster cycle”, The International Law of Disaster Relief, (Cambridge University Press, 2014), p. 9. See A/71/10, para. 48. Commentary on art. 2. Therese O’Donnell and Craig Allan, “Identifying solidarity: the ILC project on the protection of persons in disasters and human rights”, George Washington International Law Review, vol. 49, No. 1, pp. 53–95 (2016). Dug Cubie and Marlies Hesselman, “Accountability for the human rights implications of natural disasters: a proposal for systemic international oversight”, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol. 33/1 (2015), p. 18. See A/71/10, p. 70. Therese O’Donnell and Craig Allan, “Identifying solidarity: the ILC project on the protection of persons in disasters and human rights”. Dug Cubie and Marlies Hesselman, “Accountability for the human rights implications of natural disasters: a proposal for systemic international oversight”, p. 24.