Although international humanitarian law is the body of law specifically designed for application in armed conflict, lawyers and philosophers increasingly recognise the importance of human rights in armed conflict. ELAC has been at the forefront of the study of “revisionist just war theory” which begins from the premise that even in war, individuals can only be deprived of their human rights where they have done something to make them liable to forfeit those rights (Rodin, Dill).
Scholars associated with ELAC have also engaged in the legal debates about the application of human rights law in armed conflict (Akande, Dill, D'Alessandra). Questions that arise here include: Does human rights law continue to apply in armed conflict? Does the content of human rights law differ in peacetime than in time of armed conflict? When, if at all, do states engaged in military operations owe human rights obligations to persons outside their territory? What should be the proper relationship between human rights law and international humanitarian law? Can they be applied simultaneously or does one prevail over the other? What is the interplay between human rights and the jus ad bellum? Do states have obligations to refrain from and prevent aggression under international human rights law?