A/HRC/3/2 page 71 government supervision in this area for many years. It might be the opportune time for municipalities to adopt urban planning schemes for each village in order to ensure legal security of tenure. The Commission was also informed that the situation is very similar in South Beirut. In addition, the situation of widows will have to be taken into due consideration as their ownership rights might differ from those of men. Mechanisms should be devised to ensure appropriate consultation and participation in decisions concerning reconstruction. Compensation procedures should be just, timely, accessible, free of charge, and age and gender sensitive. More generally, within the process of return of people to their homes and of compensation, all relevant human rights standards related to the right to adequate housing282 should be respected and attention should be paid to the human rights standards regarding restitution and compensation.283 B. Conclusions as to violations of international humanitarian law, human rights law and international law 314. As a result of its inquiry, the Commission reaches the following conclusions: The hostilities that took place from 12 July to 14 August 2006 constitute an international armed conflict to which conventional and customary international humanitarian law and human rights law are applicable. 315. The Commission stresses that generally respect for the principle of humanity and humanitarian considerations (Martens clause) was absent during the conflict. 316. The principle of military necessity cannot justify every attack or destruction. The attacks on civilians, destruction of unoccupied houses, churches, mosques, shops, and so on do not normally contribute to defeating the enemy. In many cases, the “military necessity” element did not justify the military action taken.284 317. The Commission considers that the excessive, indiscriminate and disproportionate use of force by IDF goes beyond reasonable arguments of military necessity and of proportionality, and clearly failed to distinguish between civilian and military targets, thus constituting a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. 318. The conduct of the hostilities by IDF showed an overall lack of respect for the cardinal principles regulating the conduct of armed conflict. Israel did not respect its obligation to distinguish civilians from combatants. Treating civilians as legitimate military targets because they were friends, family or sympathizers of Hezbollah goes beyond any legal interpretation of the principle of distinction and constitutes a clear violation of international humanitarian law and human rights obligations. Treating as “terrorists” all members or affiliates of an official political party leads to an unacceptable interpretation of the law. In addition, the deliberate attacks against the houses of family, friends, members or relatives - but not fighters - of Hezbollah contravene international humanitarian law and human rights law. 319. The number of houses and residential buildings destroyed in southern Lebanon and in South Beirut does not reflect an adequate application of the principles of military necessity and proportionality. The deliberate and indiscriminate targeting of civilian houses constitutes a violation of international humanitarian law and of international human rights obligations.