The Status of Fighters in Non-International Armed Conflict

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is the law governing armed conflicts. One of its core principles is the Principle of Distinction, which enables the protection of the civilian population by distinguishing civilian people and objects from military people and objects (Dinstein 2004). Non-International Armed Conflicts (NIACs), where at least one side

is non-state, are now the most common form of conflict (IISS 2021). Yet, there are large gaps in IHL covering NIACs, including a lack of distinction between fighters and civilians. This gap leads to the current reality: tens of thousands of civilians are dying in armed conflict every month (OHCHR 2024). The project at hand will establish a

distinction between fighters and civilians, contribute to literature, and inform policies for NGOs and states, ultimately

aiming to clarify the conduct of hostilities for fighting forces, stop civilians from bearing such a horrific brunt of this violence, and open avenues for accountability. This PhD will address the research questions through a holistic approach consisting of: a textual evaluation of legal cases, statutes, and regulations; a critical analysis of literature; and extensive state and NSAG policy and practice

research. States and NSAG will be selected based on their organisation, geographical, and ideological diversity. To address who states consider to be fighters, I will analyse official statements, state legislation, state judicial decisions, and military manuals. These will be found in open-source state records and different databases for

amnesties and peace agreements. To address who NSAG consider to be fighters, I will analyse public statements, agreements, internal rules and regulations, unilateral declarations and statements, and documented practice. Recently, there has been a large amount of research and engagement collecting information about the practice of

NSAG (See Provost 2021, Heffes 2022, and Plamenac 2022 and recent studies conducted at Geneva Call and the Geneva Academy). While the focus and end goal of my research differs from those conducted in these studies, it relies on much of the same source material. It is this research, along with NSAG websites, social media accounts

if they are available, open-source databases including www.theirwords.org which has over 500 documents from over 200 groups in English, that will help fill out the contemporary views and practices of these groups. To the extent possible, literature and official NGO/IGO reports will be used to cross-check and validate the policy

and practise for NSAG and states. The main limitations here will be documents being redacted, confidential, or otherwise not available.