I.  INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICT: LEGAL SOURCES, PRINCIPLES AND ACTORS in international humanitarian law, the obligations resulting from its rules may be split up into similar categories. Since States have obligations to do something (positive obligations) or to abstain from doing something (negative obligations) under both branches, they can be responsible for a violation of international human rights and humanitarian law through action, omission or inadequate action. In international humanitarian law they have an explicit obligation to respect and to ensure respect. In international human rights law, the obligation to respect requires States not to take any measures that would prevent individuals from having access to a given right. For instance, the right to adequate food is primarily to be realized by rights holders themselves through their economic and other activities. States have a duty not to unduly hinder the exercise of those activities. This obligation to respect stemming from human rights law is applicable in both natural and man-made disasters. Similarly, the obligation to respect the right to adequate housing means that Governments must abstain from carrying out or otherwise advocating the forced or arbitrary eviction of persons or groups. States must respect people’s rights to build their own dwellings and govern their environments in a manner which most effectively suits their culture, skills, needs and wishes. Many prohibitions in international humanitarian law, e.g., of physical and moral coercion exercised against protected civilians and prisoners of war, of violence to life and person directed against persons taking no active part in the hostilities, of the requisition of foodstuffs and hospitals in occupied territories, of attacks against objects indispensable for the survival of the civilian population, function in a similar way. As part of the obligation to protect, States must prevent, investigate, punish and ensure redress for human rights violations committed by third parties, e.g., private individuals, commercial enterprises or other nonState actors. In this respect, the Human Rights Committee has recalled that “the positive obligations on States Parties to ensure Covenant rights will only be fully discharged if individuals are protected by the State, not just against violations of Covenant rights by its agents, but also against acts committed by private persons or entities that would impair the enjoyment 17