The Ethics of War in Islamic Jurisprudence: A Textual and Teleological Analysis in Comparison with International Humanitarian Law

This study analyzes the ethics of war in Islamic law (Sharia) using a combined textual (Qur’an and Sunnah) and objective-oriented (maqāṣid) framework. It examines classical juristic discourses on combat conduct, focusing on non-combatant immunity, the prohibition of mutilation, and discretionary authority (siyāsa sharʿiyya) over prisoners of war. The research argues classical jurisprudence (fiqh) formed a coherent ethical system to limit indiscriminate violence. Using a comparative textual methodology, it analyzes scriptural sources and juristic works, presenting scholarly disagreements with preferences based on Sharia’s objectives. Findings affirm core principles: prohibiting non-combatant killing and mutilation, and conditional prisoner options—amnesty, ransom, execution, or enslavement—guided by public interest and humane treatment. It concludes by reframing Islamic jus in bello as a framework for constructive engagement with International Humanitarian Law (IHL).