6 INTERNATIONAL LEGAL PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS IN ARMED CONFLICT continues to apply in situations of armed conflict. Moreover, nothing in human rights treaties indicates that they would not be applicable in times of armed conflict. As a result, the two bodies of law—international human rights law and international humanitarian law—are considered to be complementary sources of obligations in situations of armed conflict. For example, the Human Rights Committee, in its general comments Nos. 29 (2001) and 31 (2004), recalled that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights applied also in situations of armed conflict to which the rules of international humanitarian law were applicable.1 The Human Rights Council, in its resolution 9/9, further acknowledged that human rights law and international humanitarian law were complementary and mutually reinforcing. The Council considered that all human rights required protection equally and that the protection provided by human rights law continued in armed conflict, taking into account when international humanitarian law applied as lex specialis.2 The Council also reiterated that effective measures to guarantee and monitor the implementation of human rights should be taken in respect of civilian populations in situations of armed conflict, including people under foreign occupation, and that effective protection against violations of their human rights should be provided, in accordance with international human rights law and applicable international humanitarian law. Over the past few years, the application of the rules of international human rights law and international humanitarian law to situations of armed conflict has raised a series of questions concerning the implementation of the specific protections guaranteed by both bodies of law. Their concurrent application has created confusion about the obligations of the parties to a conflict, the extent of these obligations, the standards to be applied and the beneficiaries of these protections. 1  2  S  ee general comments Nos. 29 (2001) on states of emergency (art. 4), para. 3, and 31 (2004) on the nature of the general legal obligation imposed on States Parties to the Covenant, para. 11. See the discussion on the application of the principle of lex specialis in chapter II, section D, below.