Dear Muzammil,

The legal term that answers your question is "moral suasion". Fear of the consequences of prosecution and of ostracism and pressures from other parties is what serves as the deterrent along with inspections by UN agencies and international organizations. It works imperfectly but is better than nothing.

David Lempert, Ph.D., J.D., M.B.A., E.D. (Hon.)

Muzammil Rizvi Human rights during armed conflicts are protected by international laws like the Geneva Conventions, which set rules for how people should be treated in war. These laws focus on protecting civilians, prisoners, and anyone not directly involved in fighting. Countries and organizations like the United Nations work to make sure these rules are followed. However, it’s often difficult to hold people accountable for breaking these rules, and sometimes military actions can clash with the need to protect human rights. A comparative analysis helps us understand how different places try to solve these problems and improve the protection of human rights during war.

Dear Muzammil Rizvi

What is missing from your list—“international human rights law, international humanitarian law, and Islamic law”—are the omnipotent physical laws of nature, specifically the Constructal Law, which forms a fundamental foundation for “Human Rights.”

Some background:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/356475384_THE_SCIENCE_OF_RIGHTS

Global Civility: Physical Constructal Law:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0D5Z2SQBN

Human rights can be protected in the context of armed conflict by obligating both parties to an armed conflict to implement the principles of international humanitarian law, while also protecting humanitarian intervention mechanisms and prohibiting any infringement thereof. In our view, the best way to protect human rights during conflict is to call on the parties to a peace process and resolve the conflict through amicable mechanisms before resorting to forceful intervention through United Nations agencies. If these amicable methods fail,

Legal methods can be followed to resolve disputes, taking into account the principle of prompt justice.

The protection of human rights during armed conflicts is made possible through the combined application of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) and International Human Rights Law (IHRL). While IHL governs the conduct of hostilities and protects civilians and combatants no longer participating in fighting, IHRL safeguards fundamental rights at all times, including during war.

International bodies like the International Criminal Court (ICC), UN Human Rights Council, and regional courts (e.g., European Court of Human Rights, Inter-American Court of Human Rights) play vital roles in monitoring and enforcing these protections. A comparative analysis shows that regions with strong legal institutions (like Europe) offer more effective remedies, while weaker systems (in parts of Africa and Asia) often face challenges due to limited enforcement mechanisms and ongoing conflict dynamics.

Thus, the protection of human rights in armed conflict is ensured through legal frameworks, enforcement bodies, and state compliance, though its effectiveness varies significantly across different legal and regional contexts.

There are some pointers to how human rights operate and often fail in the attached ppt lectures.