Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{207297,
        author = {Vashu Sharma},
        title = {The Legal Status of Mercenaries and Foreign Fighters Under the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols: A Case Study of the Russia-Ukraine},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {13},
        number = {3},
        pages = {207-213},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=207297},
        abstract = {The contemporary landscape of armed conflict is increasingly characterized by the involvement of non-state actors and foreign individuals, presenting complex challenges to the established framework of International Humanitarian Law (IHL). This report examines the intricate legal status of mercenaries and foreign fighters under the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, using the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict as a critical case study. It delves into the precise definitions of combatants and mercenaries, highlighting the deliberate narrowness of the mercenary definition in Additional Protocol I, and contrasts this with the ambiguous, undefined status of "foreign fighters." The analysis reveals a significant tension between the static nature of IHL's codified definitions and the dynamic evolution of modern warfare practices, leading to a legal vacuum that undermines protection and accountability. Through an examination of state practices in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, particularly Ukraine's strategic integration of foreign volunteers and Russia's controversial classification of opposing foreign fighters, the report exposes systematic violations of IHL, including the denial of prisoner of war (POW) status and fair trial guarantees. It further explores the complex interplay between IHL and domestic counter-terrorism laws, which often criminalize actions lawful under IHL, and assesses the role of international accountability mechanisms. The report concludes with recommendations for clarifying legal statuses, strengthening IHL adherence, and enhancing accountability to preserve the integrity of humanitarian norms in future conflicts.},
        keywords = {},
        month = {August},
        }