尽管有不同的渊源，但国际人权法和国际人道主义法都有着维护人的生命和尊严的共同目的。
Despite their different origins, international human rights and humanitarian law share a common purpose of upholding human life and dignity.
正如前南斯拉夫问题国际法庭(前南问题国际法庭)所指出的：“尊重人的尊严这一总原则是……国际人道主义法律和人权法律存在的根本原因；实际上，在现代，这一原则已具有压倒一切的重要性，因而贯穿了国际法的总体”。
As the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has stated: “The general principle of respect for human dignity is the very raison d'être of international humanitarian law and human rights law; indeed in modern times it has become of such paramount importance as to permeate the whole body of international law.” It is not surprising that international human rights and humanitarian law are increasingly being viewed as constituting a complementary and mutually reinforcing regime of protections that should be interpreted and applied as a whole so as to accord individuals during armed conflicts the most favourable standards of protection.
25. 人权事务委员会、欧洲人权法院和原来的(欧洲)人权委员会，以及美洲人权委员会都曾判定，即使在国际人道主义法涵盖的情况下，它们各自的文书也可以域外适用。
The Human Rights Committee, the European Court and former Commission of Human Rights, and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights have found their respective instruments to apply extraterritorially, even in situations covered by international humanitarian law.
比如说，人权事务委员会1981年认定，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的一个缔约国对于其代理人在另一国家领土上实施的侵犯《公约》之下权利的行为负有责任。
For example, the Human Rights Committee in 1981 found that a State party to ICCPR was responsible for violating rights under the Covenant which its agents had committed within the territory of another State.
在最近关于《公约》第二条的第31(80)号一般性意见中，人权事务委员会指出，尊重和保障个人权利的义务“也适用于在境外采取行动的缔约国武装部队的权力范围内或者有效控制下的所有人，而不论这种权力或者有效控制是在何种情况下获得的，例如，这种武装部队是缔约国因为参加国际维持和平行动或者强制实现和平行动而派出的一支部队”(第10段)。
In its recent general comment No. 31 (80) on article 2 of the Covenant, the Committee indicated that the obligation to respect and ensure rights of individuals “also applies to those within the power or effective control of the forces of a State party acting outside its territory, regardless of the circumstances in which such power or effective control was obtained, such as forces constituting a national contingent of a State party assigned to an international peacekeeping or peace-enforcement operation” (para.
在最近的结论性意见中，人权事务委员会特别重申，《公约》域外适用于在有关国家领土之外的军事和维持和平行动。
In recent concluding observations, the Committee specifically affirmed that the Covenant applies extraterritorially to military and peacekeeping operations outside of the territory of the States concerned.
美洲和欧洲的人权机构在某些情况下也同样认定，在国家领土之外处于一国权力和控制之下的人有效地属于该国管辖范围之内，并享有美洲和欧洲各自条约规定的可依法执行的权利。
Inter-American and European human rights bodies have similarly found in certain circumstances that persons falling within a State's authority and control outside of national territory are effectively within that State's jurisdiction and holders of enforceable rights under their respective treaties.
26. 一些国家对人权机构把人权法适用于域外或武装冲突和占领期间的权限提出异议。
Several States have disputed the competence of human rights bodies to apply human rights law extraterritorially or during armed conflicts and occupations.
国际法院在两个咨询意见中对这种主张进行了阐述。
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) shed light on some of these claims in two advisory opinions that addressed issues concerning the relationship between human rights and international humanitarian law and the extraterritorial application of the Covenant and other human rights treaties.
国际法院的这两个咨询意见涉及的问题分别是人权法与国际人道主义法之间的关系，以及《公约》和其他人权条约的域外适用。
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) shed light on some of these claims in two advisory opinions that addressed issues concerning the relationship between human rights and international humanitarian law and the extraterritorial application of the Covenant and other human rights treaties.
法院在1996年7月8日关于以核武器相威胁或使用核武器的合法性问题的咨询意见 中明确指出，《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》适用于武装冲突期间。
In its Advisory Opinion of 8 July 1996 on the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, the Court made clear that the ICCPR applied during armed conflict.
法院指出，就该文书保障的生命权而言：“原则上说，一个人的生命不容任意剥夺这项权利也适用于敌对状态。
It stated regarding the right to life guaranteed in that instrument: “In principle, the right not arbitrarily to be deprived of one's life applies also in hostilities.
27. 国际法院在2004年7月9日关于在巴勒斯坦被占领土修建隔离墙的法律后果的咨询意见 中重申了这一观点，其中指出，法院“……认为，人权公约提供的保护在武装冲突中并没有停止，除非因为《公民及政治权利国际公约》第四条所述的那种克减规定造成的结果……”。
The test of what is an arbitrary deprivation of life, however, then falls to be determined by the applicable lex specialis, namely, the law applicable in armed conflict which is designed to regulate the conduct of hostilities.” The Court in its Advisory Opinion of 9 July 2004 on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories confirmed this view stating that it: “considers that the protection offered by human rights conventions does not cease in case of armed conflict, save through the effect of provisions for derogation of the kind to be found in article 4 of the [ICCPR] …”.
至于国际人道主义法律与人权法律之间的关系，法院接着指出：“……因此，存在三种可能情况：某些权利可能专属于国际人道主义法律的事项；其他权利可能专属于人权法律事项；另外一些可能专属于国际法这两种分支共同的事项”。
Concerning the relationship between human rights and humanitarian law, it added: “… there are thus three possible situations: some rights may be exclusively matters of international humanitarian law; others may be exclusively matters of human rights law; yet others may be matters of both these branches of international law”.
法院明确指出，在武装冲突的情况下，国际人道主义法律的特殊法的性质本身并不减损人权法的规定。
The Court's opinions clearly indicate that in situations of armed conflict the lex specialis character of international humanitarian law does not, as such, derogate from human rights law.
更确切地讲，在判断《公约》规定的权利是否受到了侵犯时，必须顾及人道主义法律。
Rather, humanitarian law must be consulted to determine whether a Covenant-based right has been violated.
28. 在2004年7月9日的咨询意见中，在研究了《公民权利和政治权利国际公约》的准备工作文件和人权事务委员会的裁决和意见之后，法院驳回了那种认为《公约》不适用于一国领土之外――更具体地讲不适用于被占领土――的论点。
The Court, also in its 9 July 2004 Advisory Opinion, after examining the travaux préparatoires of the ICCPR and the decisions and observations of the Human Rights Committee, rejected the argument that the Covenant was not applicable outside a State's territorial borders and, more particularly, in occupied territory.
法院虽然承认国家的管辖范围主要是地域性的，但还是得出结论说，《公约》的适用范围已经扩大到包括“国家在行使管辖权的过程中在境外实施的行为”。
While recognizing that the jurisdiction of States is primarily territorial, the Court concluded that the Covenant's reach extended to “acts done by a State in the exercise of its jurisdiction outside of its own territory”.
29. 人权条约机构对于在武装冲突期间人权法与国际人道主义法律规则如何相互关联没有共同的方法。
Human rights treaty bodies have no common approach on how human rights law relates to rules of international humanitarian law during armed conflicts.
实际上，无论是欧洲人权法院还是非洲人权和人民权利委员会，迄今为止都没有就这一主题发表任何意见。
Indeed, neither the European Court nor the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights has expressed to date an opinion on this subject.
人权事务委员会也没有就这一关系形成一套全面的理论体系。
The Human Rights Committee has not yet articulated a comprehensive theory concerning this relationship.
然而，人权事务委员会在第31(80)号一般性意见中指出：“正如第29号一般性意见所指出，《公约》也适用于国际人道主义法的规则适用的武装冲突的情况。
However, in general comment No. 31 (80) the Committee stated: “As implied in general comment No. 29, the Covenant applies also in situations of armed conflict to which the rules of international humanitarian law are applicable.
虽然，就《公约》规定的某些权利而言，国际人道主义法更为具体的规定可能更加适合对于《公约》权利的解释，但是这两种法律范围是互补的，而不是互相排斥的”(第11段)。
While, in respect of certain Covenant rights, more specific rules of international humanitarian law may be specially relevant for the purposes of the interpretation of Covenant rights, both spheres of law are complementary, not mutually exclusive” (para. 11).
30. 美洲人权委员会认为，对武装冲突情况下特定人权遵守情况进行评价的标准可以不同于平时适用的标准。
The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has recognized that the test for evaluating the observance of a particular human right in a situation of armed conflict may be distinct from that applicable in peacetime.