It is an undeniable fact that the nature of warfare is changing. The methods and weapons employed by the belligerents, the goals of the fighters and the nature of the parties involved in wars are quite different from the ‘classical’ warfare that took place in Europe and elsewhere.1 Today, non-international armed conflicts have become more frequent, not only because technological progress has made it easier for groups of individuals to have access to weaponry but also on account of increasing tension, whether ideological, inter-ethnic or economic; as a consequence the international community can no longer turn a blind eye to the legal regime of such conflicts.2 Further, involvement of the non-state entities in the non-international armed conflict challenges the distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts. It is precisely these circumstances that create a problem for application of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) principles in the situation of non-international armed conflicts. Today, the legal status of Non-State Actors (NSAs) constitutes a major problem of the law of non-international armed conflicts, the reason being that the law regulating non-international armed conflicts is vague and ambiguous. Therefore, this study is helpful in contributing and filling the gaps that exist in imposing and fixing the responsibility on NSAs for the violation of human rights in non-international armed conflicts situation.

A goal-oriented beginning of the research warrants sufficient understanding of the conceptual and theoretical frameworks. The theoretical framework objectively comprises the material on the concept of International Humanitarian Law principles which have been evolved for the purpose of balancing military necessity and to protect persons who are not or no longer taking part directly in the hostilities such as civilians, prisoners of armed conflict and other detainees, and the injured and sick.3 But ambiguity and lack of clarity in the provisions of legal regime fails to fix the accountability and legal status of Non-State Actors (NSAs) during the non-international armed conflicts.

Therefore, lex scripta governing NSAs’ responsibility during non-international armed conflicts pays less attention than it deserves to. Moreover, international tribunals have handled many cases involving the latter; their decisions often prove controversial, especially when applying the law of international armed conflict to non-international conflicts. Unfortunately, even the academic community pays less attention to the law of non-international armed conflict than merited by its legal complexity and the frequency and human consequences of the conflicts to which it applies.

Law Review Journal, Non-State Actors (NSAs), International Humanitarian Laws, NSAs, Individuals, corporations, NGOs, Laws, International Humanitarian Law (IHL), Non-International Armed Conflicts, Legal Dilemma.