From Parallelism to Convergence: IHL and Human Rights Law in Armed Conflict Governance

Armed conflicts in the twenty-first century increasingly blur the boundaries between traditional battlefields and civilian spaces, intensifying the urgency of robust legal protections for individuals caught in hostilities. This paper examines the evolving relationship between International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL), two foundational regimes governing the conduct of states and armed groups during situations of violence. While IHL serves as the lex specialis regulating conduct of hostilities, IHRL continues to apply concurrently, offering complementary guarantees for the protection of life, dignity, and liberty. Yet, practical tensions persist—particularly concerning use-of-force standards, derogation regimes, detention practices, and accountability mechanisms. Through a doctrinal analysis and selected case studies, this paper explores how these legal frameworks interact in contemporary conflicts and identifies areas where fragmentation undermines civilian protection. It argues for a more harmonised interpretive approach, strengthened institutional coordination, and enhanced domestic implementation to bridge normative gaps. By reassessing the interplay between IHL and IHRL, the paper contributes to ongoing scholarly and policy debates on strengthening civilian safeguards in both international and non-international armed conflicts.