Symposium: The Relationship between International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law
Paul Eden, Matthew Happold
Abstract
Paul Eden, Matthew Happold
Abstract
In recent years, the relationship between international humanitarian law and international human rights law has become increasingly controversial. Human rights lawyers and activists have sought to apply human rights norms to military conduct in international and internal conflicts, and during belligerent occupations. With varying degrees of success, complainants have brought their cases before international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission and Court, and to national courts able to apply international human rights standards. To a large extent, this has simply been because forums exist to hear human rights claims, whereas they do not for individuals alleging violations of international humanitarian law.1 However, human rights norms have also been seen as more restrictive; as placing greater constraints on States’ freedom to conduct hostilities, preventively detain and administer occupied territories. For this reason, governments have largely resisted attempts to extend the reach of international human rights law into areas traditionally governed by international humanitarian law.
OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In recent years, the relationship between international humanitarian law and international human rights law has become increasingly controversial. Human rights lawyers and activists have sought to apply human rights norms to military conduct in international and internal conflicts, and during belligerent occupations. With varying degrees of success, complainants have brought their cases before international tribunals such as the European Court of Human Rights and the Inter-American Commission and Court, and to national courts able to apply international human rights standards. To a large extent, this has simply been because forums exist to hear human rights claims, whereas they do not for individuals alleging violations of international humanitarian law.1 However, human rights norms have also been seen as more restrictive; as placing greater constraints on States’ freedom to conduct hostilities, preventively detain and administer occupied territories. For this reason, governments have largely resisted attempts to extend the reach of international human rights law into areas traditionally governed by international humanitarian law.
Key concepts: Human rights, Belligerent, Political science, Law, International human rights law, International law, International humanitarian law, Public international law