A/HRC/21/50 Annex II [English only] Applicable law I. Background 1. Whether during peacetime or periods of armed conflict, a substantial body of international law will be in operation. The sources comprise primarily treaties ratified by the country in question. Customary international law (CIL) is also applicable. In its first report submitted in November 2011, the Commission identified the Syrian Arab Republic‘s legal obligations under international human rights law (IHRL).1 At that time, although violent clashes were occurring, the Syrian Arab Republic was in a state of peace and has not sought to derogate from any applicable treaty provisions. 2. In its second report submitted in February 2012, the commission expressed its concern that the violence in the Syrian Arab Republic had reached the requisite level of intensity to trigger the applicability of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). However, because it could not verify whether the FSA, or its associated groups, had reached the necessary level of organization, the commission determined that it could not apply IHL. 3. During the period covered by this third report, the commission has determined that the intensity and duration of the conflict, combined with the increased organizational capabilities of the FSA,2 do, in fact, meet the legal threshold for a non-international armed conflict.3 With this determination, the commission applied IHL, including Common Article 3, in its assessment of the actions of the parties during hostilities. 4. As described below, egregious violations of human rights, customary or humanitarian law can give rise to individual criminal responsibility under international criminal law (ICL). II. Regimes in effect 5. The onset of IHL applicability does not replace existing obligations under IHRL; both regimes remain in force and are generally considered as complementary and mutually reinforcing. Where both IHL and IHRL apply, and can be applied consistently, parties to a conflict are obliged to do so. In situations where IHL and IHRL are both applicable, but cannot be applied consistently, the principle of lex specialis applies.4 1 2 3 4 A/HRC/S-17/2/Add.1 paras. 23–26. See annex III. This view is supported by the ICRC, among others. See ―the Syrian Arab Republic in civil war, Red Cross says,‖ 15 July 2012, Available from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18849362. President Assad himself described the Syrian Arab Republic as being in a state of war in a statement on 26 June 2012, see ―the Syrian Arab Republic in a State of War, says Bashar al-Assad,‖ 26 July 2012. Available from http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18598533. See Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 1996. The International Court of Justice ruled that IHL is lex specialis vis-à-vis IHRL during armed conflicts. Thus, the parties must abide by the legal regime which has a more specific provision on point. The 45