International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order

The document examines the tension between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL), identifying four primary legal logics—co-applicationist, separatist, sceptic, and operational—that shape how these frameworks interact during armed conflict. It highlights that while convergence is often viewed as a positive development in Norwegian policy, it creates significant practical and legal dilemmas regarding extraterritoriality, the principle of proportionality, and the operational clarity required by military forces.

• The debate over the relationship between international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law (IHRL) is defined by four distinct legal logics: co-applicationists, who view convergence as a positive development; separatists, who believe convergence is impossible due to the different origins and characters of the two laws; sceptics, who question the political agendas and practical utility of convergence; and operationalists, who argue that co-application creates normative vagueness that hinders military objectives and civilian protection.
• International law is undergoing three major transformations: the proliferation of the human rights regime (humanization), the increasing legalization of international organizations through 'secondary international law' and soft-law regimes, and a growing focus on the accountability of international organizations for human rights violations during peacekeeping and peace enforcement.
• IHL and IHRL differ fundamentally in their application and structure: IHL is extraterritorial by nature and focuses on restricting methods of warfare and protecting victims of armed conflict, while IHRL is traditionally linked to territorial jurisdiction and allows for derogations during public emergencies.
• The 'lex specialis' principle, which suggests that specific law (IHL) overrides general law (IHRL), has been suggested by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as a way to manage the relationship between the two, but its exact legal standing and practical utility remain unclear.
• There is an ongoing legal struggle regarding the extraterritorial application of human rights treaties, with human rights bodies expanding state responsibility to include situations where a state has 'effective overall control over a territory' or where an individual is 'in the hands' of authorities.
• The concept of 'proportionality' functions differently in each regime: IHL prohibits attacks where incidental civilian harm is excessive relative to the anticipated military advantage, whereas IHRL requires that the use of force be proportionate to the aim of protecting life, permitting lethal force only in cases of imminent danger.

APA

Sandvik, K. B. (2012). International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/f1da9be9-fa3e-4553-9223-3180c2c7e0f0/Sandvik KB 2012 International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order PRIO PB.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Sandvik, Kristin Bergtora. International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order. Peace Research Institute Oslo, 2012. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/f1da9be9-fa3e-4553-9223-3180c2c7e0f0/Sandvik KB 2012 International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order PRIO PB.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Sandvik |first1=Kristin Bergtora |title=International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |date=2012 |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/f1da9be9-fa3e-4553-9223-3180c2c7e0f0/Sandvik KB 2012 International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order PRIO PB.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{sandvik2012international, author = {Sandvik, Kristin Bergtora}, title = {{International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, year = {2012}, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/f1da9be9-fa3e-4553-9223-3180c2c7e0f0/Sandvik KB 2012 International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law in the Global Legal Order PRIO PB.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }