Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate

The debate on whether war captives may be executed has been a debate among Islamic scholars since the classical era until today. Some say war captives may be executed based on maslahat, others say it is categorically impermissible. However, in recent decades, the debate on this matter has entered a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: UUM Press 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/1/UUMJLS%2014%2001%202023%20215-236.pdf
https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/
https://doi.org/10.32890/uumjls2023.14.1.9
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Universiti Utara Malaysia
Language: English
id my.uum.repo.29378
record_format eprints
spelling my.uum.repo.293782023-04-12T03:19:55Z https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/ Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati K Law (General) The debate on whether war captives may be executed has been a debate among Islamic scholars since the classical era until today. Some say war captives may be executed based on maslahat, others say it is categorically impermissible. However, in recent decades, the debate on this matter has entered a new phase, with the opposing sides, i.e., permissible if maslahat is present versus the categorically impermissible, but with new arguments emerging aside from the reiteration of some classical arguments. Some of these new arguments are non-contextual, such as new conclusions derived from the known prophetic tradition (sunnah) and contextual arguments such as the role of international law vis-a-vis Islamic law. Using the literature review as the research method this article has examined the contemporary debate and will consider both classical arguments, as well as current contextual arguments, in the light of the usu/ al-fiqh, and how international law (particularly international humanitarian law) should affect Islamic legal rulings. It is concluded that categorically prohibiting the execution of war captives is the weaker position as it relies on an incorrect interpretation of the dalil and its unrealistic application in warfare. It is also found that the position permitting captive execution if there is maslahat is, despite being often misunderstood, the stronger position, both in terms of the dalil and its realistic application in warfare. UUM Press 2023 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en cc4_by https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/1/UUMJLS%2014%2001%202023%20215-236.pdf Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati (2023) Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate. UUM Journal of Legal Studies (UUMJLS), 14 (1). pp. 215-236. ISSN 2229-984X https://doi.org/10.32890/uumjls2023.14.1.9
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
building UUM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Utara Malaysia
content_source UUM Institutional Repository
url_provider http://repo.uum.edu.my/
language English
topic K Law (General)
spellingShingle K Law (General)
Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati
Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
description The debate on whether war captives may be executed has been a debate among Islamic scholars since the classical era until today. Some say war captives may be executed based on maslahat, others say it is categorically impermissible. However, in recent decades, the debate on this matter has entered a new phase, with the opposing sides, i.e., permissible if maslahat is present versus the categorically impermissible, but with new arguments emerging aside from the reiteration of some classical arguments. Some of these new arguments are non-contextual, such as new conclusions derived from the known prophetic tradition (sunnah) and contextual arguments such as the role of international law vis-a-vis Islamic law. Using the literature review as the research method this article has examined the contemporary debate and will consider both classical arguments, as well as current contextual arguments, in the light of the usu/ al-fiqh, and how international law (particularly international humanitarian law) should affect Islamic legal rulings. It is concluded that categorically prohibiting the execution of war captives is the weaker position as it relies on an incorrect interpretation of the dalil and its unrealistic application in warfare. It is also found that the position permitting captive execution if there is maslahat is, despite being often misunderstood, the stronger position, both in terms of the dalil and its realistic application in warfare.
format Article
author Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati
author_facet Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati
author_sort Muhammadin, Fajri Matahati
title Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
title_short Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
title_full Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
title_fullStr Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
title_full_unstemmed Executing War Captives Based on Maslahat: Reflecting on and Concluding the Contemporary Debate
title_sort executing war captives based on maslahat: reflecting on and concluding the contemporary debate
publisher UUM Press
publishDate 2023
url https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/1/UUMJLS%2014%2001%202023%20215-236.pdf
https://repo.uum.edu.my/id/eprint/29378/
https://doi.org/10.32890/uumjls2023.14.1.9
_version_ 1762964606644387840