A/HRC/11/31 page 4 had been destroyed, while access to life-saving food, medicine and shelter had been denied. Grave violations of international humanitarian and human rights law were common to many armed conflicts. Civilians had become the primary target of attacks motivated by ethnic or religious hatred, political confrontation or simply the ruthless pursuit of economic interests. It was the duty of the international community as a whole to see how best it could enhance human rights and humanitarian law protections. International human rights law and international humanitarian law shared the common goal of preserving the dignity and humanity of all. 5. The High Commissioner recalled that, over the years, the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights and, more recently, the Human Rights Council had expressed the view that, in situations of armed conflict, parties to the conflict had legally binding obligations concerning the rights of persons affected by the conflict. The Council had also recognized the importance and urgency of these problems. In line with recent international jurisprudence and the practice of relevant treaty bodies, the Council acknowledged that human rights law and international humanitarian law were complementary and mutually reinforcing. It also considered that human rights law continued to apply in armed conflict situations, taking into account when international humanitarian law applies as lex specialis. The Council 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, and that effective protection against violations of their human rights should be provided in accordance with international human rights and applicable international humanitarian law. 6. Concerning the legal framework, the High Commissioner recalled that, as an international criminal judge, she had witnessed the interaction between human rights norms and humanitarian law principles. In order to apply the adequate standards of international criminal accountability, it was useful and even essential to take into due account the different forms of protection offered by international human rights and international humanitarian law. The protection of the human rights of civilians was better served when this complementarity between international human rights and international humanitarian law were duly enforced. The International Court of Justice had recognized the dual and complementary application of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, in both its advisory opinions and its contentious cases. The Court, in its judgment on the Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda) case brought into its judgment the criteria defined in the legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian Territory advisory opinion concerning the complementary application of international human rights law and international humanitarian law in situations of armed conflict. Similarly, the International Criminal Court had also recognized the importance of human rights in its analysis of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. 7. The High Commissioner pointed out that the issues dealt with during the expert consultation were, therefore, not purely theoretical. The impact of these issues on the ground was visible on a daily basis. The challenge ahead was, on the one hand, to reflect on more effective ways to ensure that human rights and humanitarian law obligations were respected by parties to a conflict. On the other hand, when violations did occur, the analysis should focus on the means to ensure accountability for those violations. Also important was the discussion on the relationship