NORMATIVE COMPLEMENTARITY IN ARMED CONFLICT: ISLAMIC HUMANITARIAN LAW AND THE REINFORCEMENT OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

AUTHOR – MOHAMED ROSHAN AKTHAR J, STUDENT AT THE TAMILNADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY, SOEL, TNDALU

BEST CITATION – MOHAMED ROSHAN AKTHAR J, NORMATIVE COMPLEMENTARITY IN ARMED CONFLICT: ISLAMIC HUMANITARIAN LAW AND THE REINFORCEMENT OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (1) OF 2026, PG.899-914, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/YOLY8340

ABSTRACT

International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is the primary legal framework regulating armed conflict, rooted in the four Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, and customary international law. Key principles of IHL include distinction, proportionality, military necessity, and humanity, all aimed at minimizing suffering during warfare while considering military realities. However, despite its widespread acceptance, current conflicts demonstrate significant violations of IHL, which lead to civilian casualties, environmental degradation, and inconsistent enforcement. The enforcement mechanisms, such as the International Criminal Court, face challenges including jurisdictional limitations, political selectivity, and varying state cooperation complicating compliance. The article revisits classical Islamic international law, known as Siyar, to assess its humanitarian principles as potential enhancements to the current discourse on IHL reform. The analysis relies on primary Islamic legal texts like the Qur’an, Sunnah, scholarly consensus (ijmaʿ), and analogical reasoning (qiyas), alongside contributions from notable Islamic scholars such as Muhammad al Shaybani, Abu Hanifa, and Al Mawardi. It identifies a comprehensive framework regulating various aspects of armed conflict including civilian immunity, treatment of prisoners, environmental protections, and compliance with treaties. The article highlights critical distinctions between modern IHL, which operates on a positivist framework relying on state consent, and Islamic humanitarian norms, which are grounded in theological and ethical obligations. This foundational difference suggests that legal compliance may be more robust when supported by moral imperatives. Rather than proposing a replacement of IHL with religious laws or asserting either system’s superiority, the article discusses the concept of normative complementarity, arguing that Islamic humanitarian principles could enhance the cultural legitimacy and internalization of humanitarian laws, especially in Muslim majority societies where religious dialogue shapes legal perspectives. It suggests structured dialogues between Islamic scholars and international legal entities to promote compliance based on ethical engagement instead of further legal codification. The article contributes significantly to discussions of pluralism in international law, indicating the potential for integrating non-Western legal traditions into global norms. Moreover, it addresses the enforcement crisis in contemporary IHL and explores various mechanisms to address these challenges, underscoring the complexities of legal pluralism and the need for inclusivity in evolving international legal frameworks.

Keywords International Humanitarian Law (IHL); Geneva Conventions; Additional Protocols; Islamic International Law (Siyar); Muhammad al Shaybani; Abu Hanifa; Al Mawardi; Civilian Immunity; Proportionality; Military Necessity; Prisoners of War; Environmental Protection in Armed Conflict; Treaty Compliance