{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.010620915032679739, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.889423076923077, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Exploring the Link Between IHRL and IHL regarding its Simultaneous Application: A Case Study of Tribal Belt in KP for the Development of International Jurisprudence

The simultaneous application of IHL and IHRL during an armed conflict is a hugely debated area of international law. The experts have been divided into two categories. Some would say that simultaneous application is possible as IHRL is applicable in all circumstances whether of peace or of conflict. They would argue that the IHRL portion could not be disconnected from IHL as both interplay during warfare and armed conflict with each other. On the other hand, the other group of experts would argue that simultaneous application and interplay of IHL and IHRL is not possible as one is Lex Specialis and the other is Lex Generalis. They are also of the opinion that these two set of rules are different in its implementation mechanisms. Both follow different mechanisms for the implementation of its rules and the consequences of these mechanisms are entirely different. This article tries to elaborate both these opinions for the development of a consensual jurisprudence in international law. The erstwhile FATA (tribal belt in KP) is used as case study.