II.  REQUIREMENTS, LIMITATIONS AND EFFECTS OF THE CONCURRENT APPLICABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICT regimes in times of armed conflict. Furthermore, decisions by judicial and treaty bodies have further clarified the extent of lex specialis in armed conflict. Finally, the interplay between the two branches will be shown through an example in which the two seem to contradict each other, in particular in the context of the right to life and the use of force. 1.  Concurrent application: the continuous application of international human rights law A number of decisions by human rights and judicial organs have concluded that international human rights law applies at all times, irrespective of whether there is peace or an armed conflict. Meanwhile, international humanitarian law specifically applies only to situations of armed conflict. Thus, in an armed conflict, international human rights law is applicable concurrently with international humanitarian law. For example, the International Court of Justice has clearly stated that “the protection of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not cease in times of war, except by operation of article 4 of the Covenant whereby certain provisions may be derogated from in a time of national emergency”. In another case it reiterated “that the protection offered by human rights conventions does not cease in case of armed conflict, save through the effect of provisions for derogation of the kind to be found in article 4 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”77 The Human Rights Committee has stated that human rights obligations contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights “[apply] also in situations of armed conflict to which the rules of international humanitarian law are applicable.” The Committee has further indicated that “[w]hile, in respect of certain Covenant rights, more specific rules of international humanitarian law may be specially relevant for the purposes of the interpretation of Covenant rights, both spheres of law are complementary,   Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, para. 25, and Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall, para. 106. 77 55