Australian citizen Oscar Jenkins, a 33-year-old former teacher from Melbourne, was captured in December 2024 by Russian forces in the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic while serving in Ukraine’s International Legion of Territorial Defence. He was charged with serving as a “mercenary” in Ukraine’s 66th Mechanised Brigade’s 402nd Rifle Battalion and has since been sentenced to 13 years’ imprisonment in a Russian maximum-security prison.
His trial took place in the so-called Supreme Court of the Luhansk People’s Republic, but from the perspective of international humanitarian law the trial was not just a violation of the protections that should be afforded all prisoners of war, it may not be legal at all.
Here is why the trial is widely considered to be a sham, despite what the Russian Embassy in Australia claims.
The court has no real authority under international law
The Luhansk People’s Republic was declared in 2014, in violation of international law and United Nations Charter article 2(4), and is a Russian-backed region on Ukrainian territory. It is not a separate independent state and under international law it remains part of Ukraine’s sovereign territory. Any court set up on the territory would have to be established by a recognised government, which is not the case here. Puppet courts that are set up in breakaway or occupied territories without the consent of the rightful government are not valid. Consequently, any verdicts that they pass are not legitimate under international law.
The fair trial guarantees enshrined in International Humanitarian Law were not observed
Under International Humanitarian Law, all detainees must be treated humanely and afforded the fair trial guarantees recognised by international law and set out in the Geneva Conventions. These include the right to:
- Understand the charges levelled against you;
- Legal representation;
- Access to consular assistance in foreign courts;
- Opportunity to mount a defence;
- Hear and challenge the evidence against you;
- Guarantees that coerced confessions are not obtained by threat or torture.
Most importantly, International Humanitarian Law requires that the court is independent, neutral and impartial.
In Oscar Jenkins’ case, there is valid cause for concern. The trials in the Luhansk People’s Republic are closed to the public. International human rights monitors have been denied access. Legal advice is limited or completely denied. Treatment of detainees in these courts in the past has included torture, threats and forced confessions. Oscar Jenkins’ case, like that of Aiden Aslin, Shaun Pinner (both UK nationals), and Brahim Saadoune (a Moroccan citizen), is carefully staged to send a clear message to the 20,000 foreign fighters from 52 countries enlisted in the Ukrainian International Legion of Territorial Defence: this is what happens if you fight against Russia – we will treat you as a mercenary.
Unfortunately, this leaves Oscar Jenkins trapped in a puppet-legal system that exists outside of internationally recognised structures. My research reveals that foreign fighters such as Jenkins are often misclassified as mercenaries and face sham trials that not only do not meet international standards but are outright illegal. When international law falls apart, all those involved in conflict – including soldiers, aid workers and even journalists – could find themselves at risk.
