The dialectic of the relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law

    International humanitarian law in times of war and conflict, if in turn to a set of international rules from the settlement of humanitarian problems arising from armed conflicts, on the one hand, it aims to achieve the pain of war, by organizing intellectual operations or means of war. It is this post's comments, aimed at the protection of persons injured, prisoners, and civilians, as well as the properties that are affected by the armed conflict, either international human rights law is the set of rules and principles of customary legal convention and to ensure that human rights in time of peace.

- Common Principles between the two laws:

There are three common principles between the two laws, which are embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the rights stipulated by the law of Geneva these principles:

1-The principle of immunity or privacy: the individual's enjoyment of the right to respect for his life, physical and moral integrity of the inherent characteristics of his personality.

2-The principle of prevention of discrimination: the international law and human rights law and also in the prohibition of discrimination, whether on the basis of race, sex, nationality, language or social class, wealth, political views or philosophical, religious or other criterion.

3-The Principle of security, the right to security of person, recognized in sections, this is the return of judicial guarantees, in the case of peace, which is itself in a state of war in terms of war and peace in the case of peace, despite the difficulty of its application in practice.

      I have numerous rights protected by each of the two laws: the law of international humanitarian law and human rights, which represented in: the right to life, liberty, and the right to security of the person, the right to freedom of movement, family rights, the principle of civil equality, in addition to other types of rights, which was represented in the rights and freedoms of economic and cultural content of the so-called second-generation and third-generation rights.

- The similarities between the two laws:

- First: in terms of the goal, both are seeking to protect the rights recognized individuals only as members of the human community and to the area of these rights often classified during the war, as a circumstance holds an emergency.

-Secondly: These laws involved in leaving many of the rules of public international law, the fact that the individual occupies a central place in their bases, as well as the language of human rights, as well as opposed to the substantive rules of the Organization for Human Rights with the principle of reciprocity, on the other hand, the exceptional nature of the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of States, which is now called the right of intervention, as it says: " Puerta battersea that international humanitarian law and international human rights law are dependant structures located just next door in keeping their legal aspects of similarity or integration, however, belong to different systems, it is important to count the confusion between them, with the impact of mutual influence :

1-respect international humanitarian law and human rights if armed conflicts, And more precisely is aimed to achieve the effects of conflict on human rights, the international human rights law Let him talk on certain rights, proving the individual as a human being, or a member of the group, regardless of the situation of war or peace.

2-international human rights law also implies a greater general principles and rules to the college which is regulated, while international humanitarian law are of an extraordinary nature, and that the rules of armed conflict, the Paris-washington however, interception or censorship practice only at the moment when the war breaks out.

3. They also differ from the legal point of view, it was the humanitarian law: Criminal laws shall, except in the case of armed conflict, human rights law applied primarily in time of peace, any normal conditions.

4. In addition, the international law of human humanitarian law regulates the relations between States and their nationals, determine the right to their own state, while humanitarian law is concerned with the relations between the State and nationals of the enemies

- the relationship between the two laws:

       there is a relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights each branches of general international law, two distinct but complementary, and seeks both to protect individuals from the arbitrary acts and abuse, Human rights inherent in human nature and protect the two teams at all times, during times of armed conflict and in times of peace.

The international humanitarian law applies only in situations of armed conflict and, therefore, of human rights and international law applied in an integrated manner in the event of armed conflict.

International humanitarian law has abandoned the use of the word war and chose the term "armed conflict" switch on certain cases, and used force, generally apply international humanitarian law in the following cases: international armed conflicts, non-international armed conflicts, internal conflicts, foreign cases on the scope of application of international humanitarian law are The revolutions internal disturbances, that this type of armed violence is not an armed conflict, according to the rules of this law.

- Moral mechanisms between the two laws:

      Controls the broad steps necessary to remove the conflict between the two laws in the form of six controls:

1-The Authority relating to starting from the natural situation of States into the conflict.

2-The absolute prohibitions: which must be a limited number of absolute prohibitions and rights that apply to the circumstances in the case of conflict or crisis.

3-The right to life: in the sense that the right is subject to the use of massive force in legal executions and self-defense.

4-Political rights: this Orains in the legal text of the Geneva Conventions prevents governments or the occupation country restricts political rights, this indicates that it would not be difficult to develop a harmonized set of criteria for the formulation of laws.

5-The free movement of compulsory refers to the need for the laws of a legal text loose wording which would ban the move may not service, only on specific grounds and the availability of appropriate legal guarantees.

6-The international responsibility of violating the rules of law: by this is meant that it could not be regarded as military groups and opposition responsible for the violation of human rights, but is responsible for violating the rules of international humanitarian law, but there are a lot of strong arguments for the expansion of the scope of the international responsibility for grave violations of human rights.

       In sum, we note that the international law meets at the end of the human rights law specifically closing in the function of the protection of the human being, and the different circumstances of such protection means and substance, one of the objective is one that we must recognize the exceptional nature of the application of the rules of international humanitarian law related to the circumstances of the armed conflict, necessitating the application of the rights needed protection to survive.


Views: 223

Tags: :, human, humanitarian, international, law, law., rights


You need to be a member of Global Ethics Network to add comments!

Join Global Ethics Network

Comment by Hanane Saouli on August 13, 2017 at 12:26pm

thank you so much
  I hope your article will benefit you a lot  my freind Valentine Olushola Oyedipe

Comment by Valentine Olushola Oyedipe on August 13, 2017 at 9:57am

A good read.

Carnegie Council

The Future of Artificial Intelligence, with Stuart J. Russell

UC Berkley's Professor Stuart J. Russell discusses the near- and far-future of artificial intelligence, including self-driving cars, killer robots, governance, and why he's worried that AI might destroy the world. How can scientists reconfigure AI systems so that humans will always be in control? How can we govern this emerging technology across borders? What can be done if autonomous weapons are deployed in 2020?

Killer Robots, Ethics, & Governance, with Peter Asaro

Peter Asaro, co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, has a simple solution for stopping the future proliferation of killer robots, or lethal autonomous weapons: "Ban them." What are the ethical and logistical risks of this technology? How would it change the nature of warfare? And with the U.S. and other nations currently developing killer robots, what is the state of governance?

As Biden Stalls, Is the "Restorationist" Narrative Losing Ground?

U.S. Global Engagement Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev notes that former Vice President Joe Biden is, in foreign policy terms, most associated with a "restorationist" approach. How does this differentiate from other candidates? What approach will resonate most with voters?





© 2020   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.