II.  REQUIREMENTS, LIMITATIONS AND EFFECTS OF THE CONCURRENT APPLICABILITY OF INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW IN ARMED CONFLICT give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to be observed, unless to do so would unduly place the law enforcement officials at risk or would create a risk of death or serious harm to other persons, or would be clearly inappropriate or pointless in the circumstances of the incident” (arts. 9–10). In international human rights law the proportionality principle therefore applies also to the target of the force and precautionary measures, such as warnings, must also be taken for the benefit of those targets. (c)  An example of the application of the lex specialis principle As already indicated, there is much common ground between the protections offered by international humanitarian law and by international human rights law. It is where their solutions actually contradict each other that the applicable rule must be determined under the lex specialis principle. For combatants in international armed conflicts, international humanitarian law is generally considered to constitute the lex specialis in relation to the amount of force to be used against enemy combatants. The issue is much more controversial regarding fighters in non-international armed conflicts. A common example of a contradiction between the two branches is that of a member of an insurgent armed group with a continuing fighting function who is found carrying out personal (non-conflict related) activities outside the fighting area.100 Some have interpreted—by analogy with international armed conflicts—that international humanitarian law permits the authorities to shoot to kill this person. Under international human rights law, a person must be arrested and a graduated use of force must be employed. In this case, taking into account the extent of Government control (if any) over the place where the killing occurs, international human rights law should be considered as the lex specialis. International humanitarian law was made for hostilities against forces on or beyond the frontline, i.e., in a place that is not under the control of those who attack them. In traditional    See in this respect Marco Sassòli and Laura M. Olson, “The relationship between international humanitarian law and human rights law where it matters: admissible killing and internment of fighters in non-international armed conflict”, International Review of the Red Cross, vol. 90, No. 871 (September 2008), pp. 613–615. 100 67