Russia’s new law protects the Red Cross name, but enforcing it in occupied Ukraine would expose the very ties Moscow denies
The Russian Red Cross (RRC) has long denied allegations of operating in occupied Ukraine, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. In a 2024 investigation, Meduza and its partners in the Kremlin Leaks project revealed how the RRC had been working beyond Russia’s borders, in clear violation of the Red Cross movement’s rules. Our follow-up investigation revealed that the RRC expanded its operations in Ukraine’s occupied territories while receiving millions of euros in international funding. Now, Russia has enacted a new law governing the Russian Red Cross, but what this means for the organization and its operations remains unclear. Meduza asks and answers key questions about the legislation.
Meduza has condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine from the very start, and we are committed to reporting objectively on a war we firmly oppose. Join Meduza in its mission to challenge the Kremlin’s censorship with the truth. Donate today.
Where did this new law come from?
Officially titled “On the All-Russian Public Organization ‘Russian Red Cross,’” this new federal law took effect on February 1.
Drafted since at least spring 2021, the legislation includes an explanatory note linking it to a directive purportedly issued by President Vladimir Putin at a December 2022 Security Council meeting. At the time, however, the official readout said the meeting focused on pharmaceutical independence and veteran rehabilitation, omitting any mention of the Russian Red Cross.
The law grants the Russian Red Cross (Rossiysky Krasny Krest) exclusive rights to the “Red Cross” name within the Russian Federation, effectively barring any other organization from using it. But that’s where things get complicated.
What’s the connection to Ukraine’s occupied territories?
Because Russia enforces its laws in the occupied parts of the four Ukrainian territories it formally annexed in September 2022, the new Red Cross legislation presumably applies there. (These territories include the Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions.)
This means regional groups previously reported on by Meduza and its partners — such as the “Red Cross Society in the Luhansk People’s Republic,” the “Donetsk Red Cross,” the “Zaporizhzhia Region Red Cross,” and others — are theoretically banned from operating under the Red Cross name.
Notably, local groups using the Red Cross name in occupied areas of Ukraine’s Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions are not formally affiliated with the Russian Red Cross. (More on that later.)
Moreover, according to the Red Cross movement’s statutes, the RRC should not be operating on Ukrainian territory at all. The movement’s Fundamental Principles explicitly stipulate that “there can be only one Red Cross or one Red Crescent Society in any one country.” The commentary on those principles further notes that “a National Society cannot establish a section in, or send a mission to, a foreign country without the permission of the Red Cross Society in that country.”
The Ukrainian Red Cross Society (URCS) has not granted the RRC permission to operate in any of Ukraine’s internationally recognized territories.
Where does the Russian Red Cross operate officially?
Under the movement’s rules, each country may have only one national society. In Russia’s case, this is the Russian Red Cross, which has dozens of regional branches.
The RRC’s website lists 85 official branches — one for each of the 83 internationally recognized subjects of the Russian Federation, and two others based in annexed Crimea and Sevastopol. (The latter territories are internationally recognized as Ukrainian, but have been under Russia’s de facto control since 2014.)
The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), the governing body of member national societies, also states that the RRC has no branches in Ukraine’s other occupied territories.
After Meduza and its partners published the first joint investigation into the RRC’s activities in occupied Ukraine in February 2024, the IFRC launched a review of the allegations. Roughly two months later, it stated: “So far, the IFRC review process found that the Russian Red Cross does not have presence [sic] in Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia.”
Is the IFRC review ongoing?
Based on the review’s findings, the IFRC decided to establish an independent oversight group to monitor and recommend “corrective actions” to the RRC. Its mandate includes verifying that the RRC has no presence in Ukraine’s Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions.
The oversight group published its most recent press release in October 2025.
What does the new Russian law actually do?
Russia’s new Red Cross law prohibits the unauthorized use of the organization’s name and emblem, citing the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols. It also mandates that the RRC take steps to ensure accountability for the misuse of these symbols “in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.”
While unauthorized use of the Red Cross name and emblem is prohibited under Article 53 of the First Geneva Convention, Russia’s new law gives the government until September 1, 2026, to develop rules on protecting these symbols. This is the only provision of the legislation that hasn’t yet entered into force.
Is there an existing framework for protecting Red Cross symbols?
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) — the movement’s only branch with an international mandate — has developed a model law on the use and protection of the emblem.
This framework recommends that national governments provide penal, administrative, and disciplinary sanctions for misuse of Red Cross “emblems, names, and signals.” It also advises national societies to “cooperate with the authorities in their efforts to prevent and repress any misuse.” This includes informing the competent authorities of such misuse and participating “in the relevant criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings.”
Did Russia have any such rules in place before?
Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service has previously issued fines for the unauthorized use of the Red Cross emblem in advertisements. However, explicit liability for misuse has largely disappeared from Russian law since the 1996 Criminal Code took effect.
The previous Soviet-era Criminal Code contained two separate laws against misuse of Red Cross symbols. Article 202 provided punishments for civilian misuse ranging from “public censure” to corrective labor for up to one year. Under Article 269, military misuse — during wartime or in combat zones — was punishable by three to 12 months in prison.
In the 1996 Criminal Code, which remains in force today, misuse of the Red Cross emblem falls under Article 356: “Use of Banned Means and Methods of Warfare.” It provides for up to 20 years in prison for misusing the emblem during armed conflict. However, this applies specifically when the misuse results in death or serious injury, under the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions.
The Defense Ministry’s 2001 Manual on International Humanitarian Law for the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation also explicitly classifies the misuse of the Red Cross emblem as a prohibited method of warfare.
So what does all of this mean for unofficial ‘Red Cross’ groups in occupied areas?
The rationale for Russia’s new law governing its national Red Cross society remains unclear. It is likely a formality intended to mollify the IFRC, which previously recommended that the RRC “advocate for a Red Cross Law” in Russia. The IFRC later expressed support for the Russian Red Cross bill after the State Duma approved it in the first reading.
The IFRC has also urged the RRC and the Ukrainian Red Cross Society to establish “communication channels” to address humanitarian needs in the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions, as well as in Crimea.
Whether Russian authorities will actually crack down on unauthorized organizations using the Red Cross name and emblem remains to be seen. As Meduza and its partners have reported, “imposter” organizations in occupied Ukraine openly associate themselves with the Russian Red Cross. In theory, the RRC could simply absorb these existing groups — or create new local branches in the occupied territories. However, this would likely bolster Ukraine’s campaign to have the Russian Red Cross expelled from the IFRC.
Story by Denis Dmitriev