The comment you heard probably intended to address who is bound by IHL. In this regard, the comment is correct: IHL binds all parties to the conflict (i.e. state military forces and armed groups). What follows next is the question of what substantive provisions of IHL apply to whom, and under what conditions? In other words, IHL addresses all the parties to an armed conflict, but depending on whether it is international or non-international armed conflict different (specific) rules will apply.

For instance, the four Geneva Conventions (with the exception of Common Article 3) and Additional Protocol I apply only to international armed conflicts, and therefore have limited applicability to armed groups (i.e. they would apply only to armed groups that are a part of a state military or under the effective or overall control of a state's military). In contrast, Common Article 3 and Additional Protocol II apply to non-international armed conflicts, which by definition include armed groups as distinct parties to the conflict. These rules apply to armed groups and state militaries.

So, as a threshold matter, IHL contains rules that apply to all parties to the conflict. What then follows is an assessment of whether there is an international or non-international conflict and a subsequent determination of which specific treaty and customary international law rules apply to the parties.

About the author
Elizabeth Holland is Consulting Expert on International Humanitarian Law, International Association of Professionals in Humanitarian Assistance and Protection (PHAP).