- 19 C. CDL-AD(2006)009 International Humanitarian law 78. At present, International Humanitarian Law has only limited relevance for the question of the law applicable to extraordinary transfers of prisoners and secret detention on the territory or through the airspace of member States of the Council of Europe. International Humanitarian Law applies during “armed conflict” and it distinguishes between international and noninternational armed conflicts. “Armed conflict” in the sense of International Humanitarian Law refers to protracted armed violence between States or between governmental authorities and/or organised armed groups within a State.47 “State practice indicates that banditry, criminal activity, riots, sporadic outbreaks of violence and acts of terrorism do not amount to an armed conflict.”48 This means, for example, that the organised hostilities in Afghanistan before and after 2001 have been an “armed conflict” which was at first a non-international armed conflict, and later became an international armed conflict after the involvement of US troops. On the other hand, sporadic bombings and other violent acts which terrorist networks perpetrate in different places around the globe and the ensuing counter-terrorism measures, even if they are occasionally undertaken by military units, cannot be said to amount to an “armed conflict” in the sense that they trigger the applicability of International Humanitarian Law. 79. The Venice Commission considers that counter-terrorist measures which are part of what has sometimes been called “war on terror” are not part of an “armed conflict” in the sense of making the regime of International Humanitarian Law applicable to them. It considers that further reflection is necessary to consider whether any additional instrument may be needed in the future to meet or anticipate the novel threats to international peace and security.49 80. International Humanitarian Law thus only applies to such transports of prisoners through the territory and/or airspace of the member States of the Council of Europe if such prisoners have been arrested/captured in the context of an “armed conflict” as explained above. This would be the case, for example, if a prisoner was captured in an area of Afghanistan in which organized fighting takes place at the time of the arrest. In this case his or her transfer or detention would be covered by International Humanitarian Law irrespective of where he or she is transferred to or detained in Europe. If, on the other hand, persons are transported or detained who have been arrested in the territory of a State where no armed conflict takes place, or in an area in which no armed conflict takes place, International Humanitarian Law does not apply. In such cases human rights law fully applies. 81. Even in those limited cases in which International Humanitarian Law applies (in the context of extraordinary transport of prisoners) this body of law does not apply exclusively. As a general rule, human rights law applies at all times, whether in times of peace or concurrently in situations of armed conflict, to all persons subject to a State’s authority and control (“jurisdiction”). However, once an armed conflict has begun, human rights law is normally partly superseded by International Humanitarian Law, which contains rules specifically regulating the behaviour of parties to an armed conflict. For example, human rights law does not specifically take account of the regime of belligerent occupation. This means that the rules of the Hague Regulations and the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 largely serve as lex specialis. 47 See Prosecutor v. Tadic (1996) 105 ILR 419, 488. 48 The Manual of the Law of Armed Conflict, UK Ministry of Defence, Oxford (OUP) 2004, no. 3.5.1(at p. 31). 49 See Venice Commission’s opinion on possible need to further develop the Geneva Convention, CDLAD(2003)018, § 87.