Making (Logical) Sense of the Interaction between Humanitarian and Human Rights Law

This article explores the relationship between International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and Human Rights Law (HRL) in the context of armed conflicts. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has played a pivotal role in clarifying the close relationship between HRL and IHL in the Nuclear Weapons and The Wall advisory opinions. However, the Court’s views have raised concerns regarding the Martens Clause. This research offers a logical account of the ICJ’s views on the interaction between HRL and IHL rules, addressing issues related to the Martens Clause. This article explains that HRL rules will no longer be applicable during armed conflicts if they are subject to specific derogation measures. If no derogation occurs, HRL rules are still applicable in cases of armed conflicts, but IHL rules have priority because they are lex specialis. This investigation clarifies that lex specialis works as a priority rule that can lead to the non-application of an otherwise applicable HRL rule. Yet even though lex specialis prioritises IHL rules, HRL rules may still apply, thus offering protection to individuals. This article argues that the priority established by lex specialis can be overridden (or ‘defeated’), resulting in the non-application of IHL rules and the application of HRL rules instead.