Extract from ICRC publication "International humanitarian law: answers to your questions"

Fact sheet describing the main differences and similarities between international humanitarian law and international human rights law.

In what has now become a regular yearly event, the Centre for Human Rights at the London School of Economics (LSE) and the ICRC on 11 May 2005 organized a public panel discussion on a topical issue linked to international humanitarian law and human rights law.

Special issue: Human rights. Today nobody questions that IHL and human rights law apply during armed conflict, nor that they complement and influence each other. While IHL remains the special law applicable during armed conflict, conflicting norms or standards sometimes require interpretation to determine whether a rule of IHL or human rights law prevails in a concrete setting.

The aftermath of the invasion of Iraq set unprecedented challenges to the United Nations in the political and in the human rights spheres. The article looks at its role in Iraq from the angle of the involvement of the Security Council, the legal context, the protection of human rights and the strife for reconciliation, sovereignty and inclusiveness.

Special issue: Torture. This issue of the International Review deals with historical, legal, social, psychological and political questions relating to torture. It includes a discussion on the legal interpretations of the notion of torture, cruel or inhuman treatment and psychological torture, and analyses the context in which torture occurs and has occurred in the past.

This article describes the relevant interpretation of the right to life by human rights treaty bodies and analyses how this might influence the law relating to the use of force in armed conflicts and occupations where international humanitarian law is unclear.

The author addresses the international obligations of belligerents, national liberation movements and insurgent entities, looks at the growing demands that such armed groups respect human rights norms and considers some of the options for holding private military companies accountable with regard to human rights abuses.

This article unpacks the notion of the right to the truth and tests the normative strength of the concept against the practice of states and international bodies. It also considers some of the practical implications of turning “truth” into a legal right, particularly from the criminal law perspective.

The debates over the relationship between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law, have often focused on the question of whether human rights law continues to apply during armed conflict, and if so, on how these two bodies of law can complement each other.

The growing number of agencies engaged in detention-related activities has resulted in coverage of a wider range of situations by visiting mechanisms and in complementary protections for persons deprived of their liberty.

In the deprivation of liberty by agents acting outside the sovereign territory of their State, the prevention of violations of fundamental norms and values is particularly important.

International human rights law abhors a legal black hole. It applies wherever a State exercises its jurisdiction, not only in peacetime but also during armed conflict, as a compliment to humanitarian law. The deprivation of liberty is subject to certain conditions, and even initially lawful detention becomes arbitrary and contrary to law if it is not subject to periodic review.

This article focusses on the issue of fundamental standards of humanity, a set of principles to reflect both international human rights and humanitarian law, as a means to address the insufficient protection of persons in situations of internal violence.

International human rights law and international humanitarian law are traditionally two distinct branches of law, one dealing with the protection of persons from abusive power, the other with the conduct of parties to an armed conflict. Yet, developments in international and national jurisprudence and practice have led to the recognition that these two bodies of law not only share a common humanist ideal of dignity and integrity but overlap substantially in practice.

United Nations, General Assembly, 61st session, Third Committee, item 67 of the agenda, Statement by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), New York, 17 October 2006

The ICRC calls for the adoption of an International Convention against Enforced Disappearances. Speech by Philip Spoerri, director of law, International Committee of the Red Cross.

International humanitarian law, refugee law and human rights law are complementary bodies of law that share a common goal, the protection of the lives, health and dignity of persons. They form a complex network of complementary protections and it is essential that we understand how they interact. Statement at the International Association of Refugee Law Judges world conference, Stockholm, 21-23 April 2005, by Emanuela-Chiara Gillard, ICRC Legal Adviser.

In his address to the 61st session of the UN Commission on Human Rights, the ICRC's President, Jakob Kellenberger, focused on the protection of persons deprived of liberty.

31st Round Table on Current Problems of International Humanitarian Law, San Remo, 4-6 September 2008. International Institute of Humanitarian Law in collaboration with the International Committee of the Red Cross.

The section International Human Rights of EISIL highlights important instruments and web resources for researching various topics within human rights as well as the different regional systems.

A collection of the most important international documents on human rights