What is the difference between International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL)?

International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

Objective: IHL aims to limit the effects of armed conflict by protecting those who are not participating in hostilities (such as civilians and wounded soldiers) and by restricting and regulating the means and methods of warfare that combatants may use.

Applicability: It is primarily applicable in times of armed conflict, whether international or non-international. The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols are key instruments of IHL.

Principles: Key principles include distinction (between combatants and non-combatants), proportionality, necessity, and humanity.

Enforcement: It is enforced through mechanisms like the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), international tribunals (e.g., the International Criminal Court), and national courts.

International Human Rights Law (IHRL)

Objective: IHRL seeks to ensure the protection and promotion of fundamental human rights and freedoms for individuals at all times. It covers a broad spectrum of rights, including civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.

Applicability: It applies in all circumstances, in times of peace as well as during conflict, though certain rights may be derogated from in times of national emergency, as long as such derogations are not inconsistent with other obligations under international law.

Instruments: Key instruments include the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

Enforcement: Enforced through mechanisms like the United Nations Human Rights Council, treaty bodies associated with particular conventions, and regional bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Key Differences

Context of Application: IHL is specifically designed for situations of armed conflict, focusing on the conduct of hostilities and the protection of persons who are not or no longer participating in hostilities, while IHRL applies at all times, with certain rights subject to limitation or derogation in emergencies, including armed conflict.

Scope of Rights and Protections: IHRL provides a broad framework of rights that apply to all individuals, while IHL focuses on protecting those affected by armed conflict and restricting the means and methods of warfare.

Legal Instruments and Enforcement Mechanisms: While both areas have their own sets of treaties, conventions, and enforcement mechanisms, the specifics of these instruments and their application can vary significantly.

In practice, IHL and IHRL often overlap, and efforts are made to interpret and apply them in a complementary manner, especially in situations of armed conflict where both bodies of law contribute to the protection of individuals.