This study offers a structured analysis of environmental protection mechanisms under international human rights law and international humanitarian law. Employing a descriptive-analytical approach, the research reveals that while these two legal regimes share common foundations such as the protection of life and human dignity they apply distinct methods to safeguard the environment. International human rights law provides indirect protection by “greening” core rights, particularly the rights to life, health, and an adequate standard of living. Conversely, international humanitarian law articulates explicit legal norms that limit environmental harm during armed conflict, as reflected in the 1977 Additional Protocol I and other relevant conventions. The comparative assessment highlights the advantages and shortcomings of both systems: human rights law demonstrates adaptability in addressing emerging environmental issues, whereas humanitarian law imposes stricter standards for preventing intentional environmental destruction. Despite their differing scopes, both frameworks face similar implementation and monitoring challenges. The study ultimately argues that fostering convergence between these regimes and enhancing oversight mechanisms is crucial for developing a comprehensive international legal framework for environmental protection. It further recommends that binding legal obligations be strengthened to address growing environmental threats and fill current legal gaps in both peacetime and conflict settings.