International Humanitarian Law is a set of rules to limit the effects of armed conflict, whereas International Human Rights Law seeks to ensure a set of rights which are essential for survival of humans as Humans." Distinguish between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law in terms of their contents and purposes.

The specter of armed conflict and human suffering has consistently driven the development of international law. Two crucial branches addressing these issues are International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). The recent conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have starkly highlighted the relevance of both, underscoring the need to distinguish between their distinct yet interconnected roles. While IHL seeks to mitigate the effects of armed conflict, IHRL aims to guarantee fundamental rights to all individuals, irrespective of conflict or peace. This answer will delineate the contents and purposes of each, emphasizing their differences and acknowledging their evolving relationship. International Humanitarian Law (IHL) IHL, also known as the Law of Armed Conflict, is a set of rules that aim to limit the barbarity of war and protect those who are not, or are no longer, participating in hostilities. Its origins lie in the Geneva Conventions of 1864 and subsequent Additional Protocols of 1949 and 1977. Purpose of IHL The primary purpose of IHL is to minimize human suffering during armed conflicts. It doesn't prohibit war itself, but rather regulates how it is conducted. It aims to protect civilians, prisoners of war, and other vulnerable individuals. Contents of IHL Core Principles: Distinction (between combatants and civilians), Proportionality (avoiding excessive harm to civilians), Humanity (treating all individuals with dignity). Key Instruments: Geneva Conventions (1864, 1906, 1929, 1949) – cover treatment of wounded soldiers, prisoners of war, and civilians in wartime. Additional Protocols (1977) – address internal armed conflicts and protect victims of war. Protected Persons: Civilians, medical personnel, humanitarian workers, prisoners of war, the wounded and sick. Prohibited Conduct: Attacks on civilians, indiscriminate bombing, use of prohibited weapons (e.g., chemical weapons, landmines – Ottawa Treaty, 1997), torture, and summary executions. International Human Rights Law (IHRL) IHRL is a body of law that guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms to all individuals, regardless of their nationality, race, religion, sex, or any other status. It emerged from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and has been further developed through numerous treaties and conventions. Purpose of IHRL The fundamental purpose of IHRL is to protect the inherent dignity and freedom of all human beings. It aims to ensure that everyone has the right to live free from fear, want, and oppression. Contents of IHRL Core Rights: Civil and political rights (freedom of speech, right to a fair trial), economic, social, and cultural rights (right to education, healthcare, adequate standard of living), and collective rights (right to self-determination). Key Instruments: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD, 1965), Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979). Universality & Inalienability: Human rights are universal, meaning they apply to everyone everywhere. They are also inalienable, meaning they cannot be taken away except in specific situations and according to due process. Comparative Analysis: IHL vs. IHRL The following table highlights the key differences between IHL and IHRL: Feature International Humanitarian Law (IHL) International Human Rights Law (IHRL) Trigger Armed Conflict Always applicable, regardless of conflict Scope Applies primarily during armed conflicts Applies at all times Beneficiaries Combatants and non-combatants in armed conflict All individuals Purpose Minimize suffering in war Protect fundamental rights and freedoms Legal Basis Customary international law, treaties (Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols) Treaties (ICCPR, ICESCR), customary international law, UDHR Derogation Limited derogation possible in situations of national emergency, but must be proportionate Limited derogation possible during public emergencies, but must be strictly time-limited and proportionate Interplay and Evolution While distinct, IHL and IHRL are increasingly intertwined. IHRL principles, particularly the emphasis on human dignity and the prohibition of torture, have influenced the interpretation and application of IHL. The principle of universal jurisdiction, where national courts can prosecute individuals for serious international crimes (like war crimes and crimes against humanity) regardless of where they were committed, reflects this convergence. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC, 1998) exemplifies this integration, incorporating elements of both IHL and IHRL. Example: The Gaza Conflict The ongoing conflict in Gaza highlights the tensions and interplay between IHL and IHRL. IHL governs the conduct of hostilities, while IHRL addresses the broader human rights situation of Palestinians, including issues of occupation, blockade, and freedom of movement. The proportionality principle under IHL is constantly scrutinized in relation to the impact on civilian lives. The Bosnian War (1992-1995) The Bosnian War witnessed widespread atrocities, including ethnic cleansing and systematic violence. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) played a crucial role in prosecuting individuals for violations of IHL and IHRL, demonstrating the increasing convergence of these two branches of international law. The ICTY's judgments established important precedents for holding individuals accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity, contributing to the development of both IHL and IHRL. Can IHL supersede IHRL during armed conflict? While IHL can allow for certain restrictions on rights during armed conflict (derogation), these must be strictly proportionate and necessary, and cannot completely override fundamental IHRL principles, particularly the prohibition of torture and slavery. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) The NHRC in India is a statutory body that investigates human rights violations and promotes awareness of human rights. While not directly focused on IHL, its work on human rights contributes to the broader understanding and protection of human dignity, which is relevant to both IHL and IHRL. 1993 Jus Cogens Jus cogens refers to peremptory norms of international law that are considered binding on all states and cannot be derogated from. Certain human rights, such as the prohibition of genocide and slavery, are recognized as jus cogens and therefore impact the application of both IHL and IHRL. According to the ICRC, in 2022, there were 92 armed conflicts globally, affecting an estimated 141 million people. Proportionality Principle A core principle in both IHL and IHRL, proportionality requires that any actions taken must be carefully weighed against the expected harm to civilians or the infringement of rights. The harm must be minimized and justified by the military or societal objective. The UN estimates that approximately 70% of casualties in armed conflicts are civilians, highlighting the urgent need for effective IHL implementation. In conclusion, International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law are distinct but complementary bodies of law, each serving a vital purpose in protecting human dignity. While IHL addresses the conduct of armed conflict, IHRL ensures the protection of fundamental rights for all. The increasing convergence of these two fields, exemplified by the ICC and the growing emphasis on universal human rights principles, reflects a global commitment to minimizing suffering and promoting justice. Continued efforts are needed to strengthen the implementation and enforcement of both IHL and IHRL to ensure a more humane and equitable world.

IHL vs. IHRL: Contents & Purposes | UPSC Mains LAW-PAPER-I 2023

The specter of armed conflict and human suffering has consistently driven the development of international law. Two crucial branches addressing these issues are International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). The recent conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza have starkly highlighted the relevance of both, underscoring the need to distinguish between their distinct yet interconnected roles. While IHL seeks to mitigate the effects of armed conflict, IHRL aims to guarantee fundamental rights to all individuals, irrespective of conflict or peace. This answer will delineate the contents and purposes of each, emphasizing their differences and acknowledging their evolving relationship.

International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

IHL, also known as the Law of Armed Conflict, is a set of rules that aim to limit the barbarity of war and protect those who are not, or are no longer, participating in hostilities. Its origins lie in the Geneva Conventions of 1864 and subsequent Additional Protocols of 1949 and 1977.

Purpose of IHL

The primary purpose of IHL is to minimize human suffering during armed conflicts. It doesn't prohibit war itself, but rather regulates how it is conducted. It aims to protect civilians, prisoners of war, and other vulnerable individuals.

Contents of IHL

Core Principles: Distinction (between combatants and civilians), Proportionality (avoiding excessive harm to civilians), Humanity (treating all individuals with dignity).
Key Instruments: Geneva Conventions (1864, 1906, 1929, 1949) – cover treatment of wounded soldiers, prisoners of war, and civilians in wartime. Additional Protocols (1977) – address internal armed conflicts and protect victims of war.
Protected Persons: Civilians, medical personnel, humanitarian workers, prisoners of war, the wounded and sick.
Prohibited Conduct: Attacks on civilians, indiscriminate bombing, use of prohibited weapons (e.g., chemical weapons, landmines – Ottawa Treaty, 1997), torture, and summary executions.

International Human Rights Law (IHRL)

IHRL is a body of law that guarantees fundamental rights and freedoms to all individuals, regardless of their nationality, race, religion, sex, or any other status. It emerged from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 and has been further developed through numerous treaties and conventions.

Purpose of IHRL

The fundamental purpose of IHRL is to protect the inherent dignity and freedom of all human beings. It aims to ensure that everyone has the right to live free from fear, want, and oppression.

Contents of IHRL

Core Rights: Civil and political rights (freedom of speech, right to a fair trial), economic, social, and cultural rights (right to education, healthcare, adequate standard of living), and collective rights (right to self-determination).
Key Instruments: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966), International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966), Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD, 1965), Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW, 1979).
Universality & Inalienability: Human rights are universal, meaning they apply to everyone everywhere. They are also inalienable, meaning they cannot be taken away except in specific situations and according to due process.

Comparative Analysis: IHL vs. IHRL

The following table highlights the key differences between IHL and IHRL:

Feature	International Humanitarian Law (IHL)	International Human Rights Law (IHRL)
Trigger	Armed Conflict	Always applicable, regardless of conflict
Scope	Applies primarily during armed conflicts	Applies at all times
Beneficiaries	Combatants and non-combatants in armed conflict	All individuals
Purpose	Minimize suffering in war	Protect fundamental rights and freedoms
Legal Basis	Customary international law, treaties (Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols)	Treaties (ICCPR, ICESCR), customary international law, UDHR
Derogation	Limited derogation possible in situations of national emergency, but must be proportionate	Limited derogation possible during public emergencies, but must be strictly time-limited and proportionate

Interplay and Evolution

While distinct, IHL and IHRL are increasingly intertwined. IHRL principles, particularly the emphasis on human dignity and the prohibition of torture, have influenced the interpretation and application of IHL. The principle of universal jurisdiction, where national courts can prosecute individuals for serious international crimes (like war crimes and crimes against humanity) regardless of where they were committed, reflects this convergence. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC, 1998) exemplifies this integration, incorporating elements of both IHL and IHRL.

Example: The Gaza Conflict The ongoing conflict in Gaza highlights the tensions and interplay between IHL and IHRL. IHL governs the conduct of hostilities, while IHRL addresses the broader human rights situation of Palestinians, including issues of occupation, blockade, and freedom of movement. The proportionality principle under IHL is constantly scrutinized in relation to the impact on civilian lives.

The Bosnian War (1992-1995) The Bosnian War witnessed widespread atrocities, including ethnic cleansing and systematic violence. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) played a crucial role in prosecuting individuals for violations of IHL and IHRL, demonstrating the increasing convergence of these two branches of international law. The ICTY's judgments established important precedents for holding individuals accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity, contributing to the development of both IHL and IHRL.

Can IHL supersede IHRL during armed conflict? While IHL can allow for certain restrictions on rights during armed conflict (derogation), these must be strictly proportionate and necessary, and cannot completely override fundamental IHRL principles, particularly the prohibition of torture and slavery. National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) The NHRC in India is a statutory body that investigates human rights violations and promotes awareness of human rights. While not directly focused on IHL, its work on human rights contributes to the broader understanding and protection of human dignity, which is relevant to both IHL and IHRL. 1993 Jus Cogens Jus cogens refers to peremptory norms of international law that are considered binding on all states and cannot be derogated from. Certain human rights, such as the prohibition of genocide and slavery, are recognized as jus cogens and therefore impact the application of both IHL and IHRL. According to the ICRC, in 2022, there were 92 armed conflicts globally, affecting an estimated 141 million people. Proportionality Principle A core principle in both IHL and IHRL, proportionality requires that any actions taken must be carefully weighed against the expected harm to civilians or the infringement of rights. The harm must be minimized and justified by the military or societal objective. The UN estimates that approximately 70% of casualties in armed conflicts are civilians, highlighting the urgent need for effective IHL implementation.

IHL vs. IHRL: Contents & Purposes

Model Answer

Introduction