 How do we distinguish international humanitarian law from international human rights law and international criminal law? IHL and IHRL are bodies of international law that share some of the same aims, both protect the lives and dignity of individuals. However, they also have many differences. Apart from a few preparations required in peacetime, IHL applies only in armed conflicts. IHRL applies at all times, whether during peace or war. IHL is binding to all parties to a conflict, whether they are states or non-state groups. IHRL imprinceable binds only states. IHL cannot be derogated from. It was made specifically for the extreme situation of armed conflict. In contrast, under strict conditions, IHRL allows for derogations from certain rights during public emergencies that threaten the life of a nation. IHL also interacts with international criminal law, ICL. IHL regulates armed conflicts. It also requires the criminal repression of serious violations of IHL, war crimes. The 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol 1 outline specific serious violations as grave breaches. State parties must enact any legislation necessary to provide effective penal sanctions for persons committing or ordering any of these breaches. They must search for persons alleged to have committed or ordered such breaches and bring them before their own courts, regardless of their nationality, or extradite them to another state party. Certain other serious violations need to be criminally repressed under customary IHL. IHL recognizes that serious violations of IHL can also be prosecuted on the international level. Examples are the International Military Tribunals after World War II and the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Today, the International Criminal Court can prosecute war crimes, provided it has jurisdiction. IHL, IHRL and ICL are complementary. However, each has its own unique role in armed conflicts.