72 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ARMED CONFLICT judicial forms of accountability as an alternative to criminal justice will be addressed at the end. A. STATE RESPONSIBILITY FOR VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW State responsibility for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law has long been a foundation of international law. State responsibility stems from the principle of pacta sunt servanda, which means that every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.103 Even beyond treaty obligations, the International Law Commission’s draft articles on State responsibility recall the general principle of international law that the breach of a State’s international obligation constitutes an international wrongful act, which entails the international responsibility of that State (draft arts. 1–2). In this context, it is useful to recall that a State is responsible for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law in the context of armed conflict if the violations are attributable to it, such as:  Violations committed by its organs, including its armed forces;  Violations committed by persons or entities empowered to exercise elements of governmental authority;  Violations committed by persons or groups acting in fact on its instructions, or under its direction or control;  Violations committed by private persons or groups which it acknowledges and adopts as its own conduct.104 A State may also be responsible for lack of due diligence if it has failed to prevent or punish violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by private actors.   Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, art. 26.   See Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001, vol. II (Part Two), p. 26. 103 104