Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T06:20:56.517Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Islam and international humanitarian law: From a clash to a conversation between civilizations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 April 2010

James Cockayne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
International Review of the Red Cross , Volume 84 , Issue 847: Terrorisme/Terrorism , September 2002 , pp. 597 - 626
Copyright
Copyright © International Committee of the Red Cross 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Huntington, Samuel P., “The clash of civilizations?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3, Summer 1993, p. 22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Compare Hadar, Leon T., “What green peril?”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 2, Spring 1993, p. 27CrossRefGoogle Scholar; contrast Miller, Judith, “The challenge of radical Islam”, Foreign Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 2, Spring 1993, p. 43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

2 See, for example, Ereksoussi, M. K., “Le Coran et les Conventions humanitaires”, Revue internationale de la Croix-Rouge, No. 503, November 1960, pp. 641–650Google Scholar; Mahmassani, Sobhi, “The principles of international law in the light of Islamic doctrine”, Recueil des cours, 1966–1971, p. 201Google Scholar; Algase, R.C., “Protection of civilian lives in warfare: A comparison between Islamic law and modern international law concerning the conduct of hostilities”, Military Law and Law of War Review, 1977, p. 246Google Scholar; Achour, Yadh ben, “Islam et droit international humanitaire”, Revue internationale de la Croix-Rouge, No. 722, March-April 1980, p. 59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sultan, Hamid, “La conception islamique” in Les dimensions internationales du droit humanitaire, Pedone, UNESCO, Paris, and Institut Henry Dunant, Geneva, 1986, pp. 47–60Google Scholar; El-Dakkak, Said, “Le droit international humanitaire entre la conception islamique et le droit international positif”, Revue internationale de la Croix-Rouge, No. 782, March-April 1990, p. 111CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Busuttil, J., “‘Slay them wherever you find them’: Humanitarian law in Islam”, Revue de droit militaire et de droit de la guerre, Vol. 30, 1991, pp. 111–145Google Scholar; Bedjaoui, Mohammed, “The Gulf War of 1980–1988 and the Islamic conception of international law” in Dekker, Ige F. and Post, Harry H.G. (eds), The Gulf War of 1980–1988, T.M.C. Asser Institute, The Hague, 1992, p. 282Google Scholar; Malekian, Farhad, The Concept of Islamic International Criminal Law: A Comparative Study, Kluwer Academic, Norwell, MA, 1994Google Scholar; Bennoune, K., “As-Salamu ‘Alaykum? Humanitarian law in Islamic jurisprudence”, Massachussets journal of IL, 1994, pp. 605–643Google Scholar; Zemmali, Ameur, Combattants et prisonniers de guerre en droit islamique et en droit international humanitaire. Éditions A. Pedone, Paris, 1997.Google Scholar Other useful expositions of classical Islamic warfare doctrine can be found in Khadduri, Majid, The Islamic Law of Nations, Shaybani's Siyar, The John Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1966Google Scholar; Khadduri, Majid, War and Peace in the Law of Islam, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, 1984Google Scholar; Johnson, James Turner and Kelsay, John (eds), Cross, Crescent, and Sword: The Justification and Limitation of War in Western and Islamic Tradition, Greenwood Press, Westport, CT, 1990Google Scholar; Jurji, Edward J., “The Islamic theory of war”, Moslem World, Vol. 30, 1940, pp. 332–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peters, R. (trans, and annot.), Jihad in Mediaeval and Modern Islam: The chapter on jihad from Averroes’ Legal Handbook ‘Bidayat al Mudjtahid’ and The Treatise ‘Koran and Fighting’ by the late Shaykh Al-Azhar, Mahmud Shaltut, E.J. Brill, Leiden, 1977Google Scholar; and Conrad, G., “Combat and prisoners of war in classical Islamic law: concepts formulated by Hanafi jurists of the 12th century”, Revue de droit pénal militaire et de droit de la guerre, 1981, pp. 269–307.Google Scholar

3 Notably Bedjaoui, op. cit. (note 2).

4 On the notion of legal traditions see particularly Patrick Glenn, H., Legal Traditions of the World, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2000.Google Scholar

5 On the concept of orientalism see Said, Edward, Orientalism, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1978.Google Scholar

6 See ben Achour, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 59.Google Scholar

7 See for example Boisard, Marcel, “On the probable influence of Islam on western public and international law”, International Journal of Middle East Studies, Vol. 11, 1980, pp. 429–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Taube, Baron Michel de, “Études sur le développement historique du droit international dans l'Europe orientale” in Recueil des Cours, 1926-I, p. 341Google Scholar, pp. 393–394. See also 1907 Hague Convention Relative to the Opening of Hostilities, Oct. 18,1907, 36 Stat. 2259, 2271 (pt. 2) TS No. 538,1 Bevans 619. Said El-Dakkak, in contrast, states that “la conception islamique ne pose pas comme condition l'existence d'une guerre au sens traditionnel du terme, c'est-à-dire, selon une conception qui implique, outre l'existence de faits d'armes, l'exigence de la déclaration de guerre entre deux ou plusieurs Parties.” See El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 112.Google Scholar

9 Christopher Weeramantry, G., Islamic Jurisprudence: An International Perspective, Macmillan, Houndmills, 1988, pp. 149–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Declaration Respecting Maritime Law, Paris, 16 April 1856.

11 See for example Rechid, Ahmed, “L'Islam et le droit des gens”, Recueil des Cours, 1937-II, p. 371, pp. 378–380.Google Scholar

12 See Johnson and Kelsay, op. cit. (note 2); see also Taube, de, op. cit. (note 8), pp. 387–390.Google Scholar

13 Vittoria, F., “The second relection on the Indians, or on the law of war made by the Spaniards on the barbarians” in Carnegie, A. (ed.), De Indis et de iure belli relectiones (trans. Bate, J.P.), New York, 1917, p. 179 (36).Google Scholar

14 Dunant, H., A Memory of Solferino, ICRC, 1986Google Scholar (first published in French in 1882), excerpted in Boissier, Pierre, Histoire du Comité International de la Croix-Rouge: De Solferino à Tsushima, Henry Dunant Institute, Geneva, 1978, p. 35.Google Scholar See also ibid., p. 213, on the differing approaches to the European and Ottoman powers in the provision of medical assistance during the Crimean War.

15 Ibid.

16 Ibid., pp. 11–12. See also ICRC, La guerre et la charité, ICRC, Geneva, 1866.Google Scholar

17 See Deming, Richard, Heroes of the International Red Cross, ICRC, New York, 1969, pp. 5, 8–10, 14.Google Scholar

18 Dunant writing in Notice sur la Régence de Tunis (1858), quoted in Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 17.Google Scholar

19 Dunant writing in La guerre et la charité, op. cit. (note 16).

20 Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), pp. 24–25.Google Scholar

21 See, for example, Deming, , op. cit. (note 17), p. 7.Google Scholar

22 Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded in Armies in the Field, Geneva, 22 August 1864. Turkey ratified the Convention on 5 July 1865.

23 On 5 December 1874.

24 Turkey was one of the original signatories to the Additional Articles relating to the Condition of the Wounded in War, Geneva, 20 October 1868.

25 Turkey also signed and ratified the Declaration Renouncing the Use, in Time of War, of Explosive Projectiles Undergo Grammes Weight, St Petersburg, 29 November/11 December 1868.

26 Ibid.

27 Quoted in Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 288.Google Scholar

28 In 1888 Moynier wrote that in the Red Cross “il est impossible de ne pas voir un produit de la civilisation chrétienne”: Moynier, G., Les causes du succès de la Croix-Rouge, monograph, Geneva, 1888Google Scholar, republished as “Introduction” in Le Mémorial des vingt-cinq premières années de la Croix-Rouge, ICRC monograph, Geneva, 1888, excerpted in Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 455.Google Scholar

29 ICRC, La neutralité des militaires blessés, pamphlet presented at the Paris Exhibition, excerpted in Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 268.Google Scholar

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid., p. 267.

32 Ibid.

33 ICRC, La guerre et la charité, excerpted in Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 262.Google Scholar

34 Ibid.

35 Ibid., pp. 287–289.

36 Ibid., pp. 393–394.

37 Ibid., p. 394.

38 Ibid., pp. 391–398.

39 Ibid., p. 288.

40 In 1882, in La Croix-Rouge, son passé, son avenir, Moynier repeated this sentiment, characterizing the Convention as “une déclaration, comme une reconnaissance de certaines lois d'ordre supérieur, auxquelles telle ou telle nation s'honore de se soumettre spontanément, et dont le caractère impératif est absolu.” Ibid.

41 Message from the Sublime Porte to the Federal Council, 16 November 1876, quoted in the Bulletin international des Sociétés de Secours aux Militaires blessés, No. 29, January 1877, pp. 35–37, p. 36.

42 Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 401.Google Scholar

43 Bulletin international des Sociétés de Secours aux Militaires blessés. No. 29, January 1877; see also Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 402.Google Scholar

44 See communications reproduced in the Bulletin international des Sociétés de Secours aux Militaires blessés, No. 29, January 1877, pp. 35–37; No. 30, April 1877, pp. 39–47; No. 31, July 1877, pp. 83–91; No. 32, October 1877, pp. 147–154.

45 See Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 405.Google Scholar

46 See Eyffinger, Arthur, The 1899 Hague Peace Conference: ‘The Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999Google Scholar; Hull, William I., The Two Hague Conferences and their Contributions to International Law, Ginn & Company, Boston, 1908Google Scholar; reprinted Kraus Reprint Co., New York, 1970.

47 Compare Eyffinger, , op. cit. (note 46), p. 97.Google Scholar

48 Ibid., pp. 170–171,193–194.

49 See Hull, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 253–4.Google Scholar Ironically, throughout the 1899 Conference, the Turkish delegation was dogged by allegations of religious discrimination within the Ottoman Empire of the Armenian Christian minority: see Eyffinger, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 349–351.Google Scholar

50 Eyffinger, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 268Google Scholar, 277–278, 279.

51 Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), p. 499.Google Scholar

52 See Hull, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 114–115, 118.Google Scholar

53 See Bugnion, François, “The red cross and red crescent emblems”, Revue Internationale de la Croix-Rouge/International Review of the Red Cross, No. 272, October 1989, p. 408Google Scholar; Hull, , op. cit. (note 46), p. 118Google Scholar; see also Actes de la Conférence de Révision réunie à Genève du u juin au 6/uillet 1906, Imprimerie Henry Jarrys, Geneva, 1906, pp. 17, 63, 160–164, 175, 199, 214, 260 and 286.

54 See Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field, Geneva, 6 July 1906, Art. 18: “As a compliment to Switzerland, the heraldic emblem of the red cross on a white ground, formed by reversing the Federal colours, shall be retained as the emblem and distinctive sign of the Army Medical Services.”

55 See Boissier, , op. cit. (note 14), pp. 105–107, 499.Google Scholar

56 Boissier suggests that the delegates at the 1899 Conference believed the version of events they enshrined, despite its inaccuracy. He notes that it was a version of events which “Moynler lui-même a très curieusement accréditée dans plusieurs de ses écrits.” Given Moynier's other efforts to promote the secularist moment in the Red Cross movement, it is perhaps not so curious that he should have accredited such a secularist version of events: ibid., p. 499.

57 See Hull, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 11, 13Google Scholar; Eyffinger, , op. cit. (note 46), pp. 96–99.Google Scholar

58 See Lloyd George, D., The Truth About the Peace Treaties, Victor Gollancz, London, 1938Google Scholar, especially at Chapters XXII–XXVI.

59 Convention for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armies in the Field, Geneva, 27 July 1929, Art. 19:

“As a compliment to Switzerland, the heraldic emblem of the red cross on a white ground, formed by reversing the Federal colours, is retained as the emblem and distinctive sign of the medical service of armed forces. Nevertheless, in the case of countries which already use, in place of the Red Cross, the Red Crescent or the Red Lion and Sun on a white ground as a distinctive sign, these emblems are also recognized by the terms of the present Convention.”

See Actes de la Conférence diplomatique convoquée par le Conseil fédéral suisse pour la Révision de la Convention du 6 juillet 1906 pour l'Amélioration du Sort des Blessés et Malades dons les Armées en Campagne, et pour l'Elaboration d'une Convention relative au Traitement des Prisonniers de Guerre, réunie à Genève du 1er au 27 juillet 1929, Imprimerie du Journal de Genève, Geneva, 1930, pp. 19, 247–254,570,615 and 666.

60 John Strawson, ”Encountering Islamic law“, available at <http://www.iiu.edu.my/deed/lawbase/jsrps.html>.

61 Khadduri, Majid, ”Islam and the modern law of nations“, American journal of International Law, Vol. 50, 1956, pp. 353–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar, p. 358; Strawson, op. cit. (note 60), notes that Persia adopted a constitution based on the Belgian model in 1906, and was followed by Egypt in 1923.

62 Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 295–296.Google Scholar

63 See John Kelsay, ”Islam and the distinction between combatants and noncombatants“, in Johnson, and Kelsay, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 197, pp. 207–8.Google Scholar

64 Statute of the Permanent Court of International Justice, adopted pursuant to Article 14 of the League of Nations.

65 See ”Proceedings of international conferences on comparative law of 1932,1937, in Bulletin trimestriel de la Société de législation comparée, 1937, pp. 346–7.

66 See Memoranda presented in September 1939 to the League of Nations and on 17 April 1945 to the United Nations Conference in San Francisco; see also Mahmassani, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 222.Google Scholar Articles 9 and 38(1)(c) of the Statute of the International Court of justice, appended to the United Nations Charter, reproduce Articles 9 and 38(3) of the (PCI) Statute almost verbatim.

67 See Lauterpacht, Elihu, “The legal irrelevance of the ‘state of war’”, ASIL Proceedings 1968, pp. 58–68Google Scholar; Stone, Julius, Of Law and Nations, 1974, p. 427 ff.Google Scholar Particularly important in this debate was the contribution by the Egyptian legal expert Georges Abi-Saab, both in his writings (see particularly Abi-Saab, G., “Wars of national liberation and the laws of war”, Annales d'Études lnternationales, Vol. 3, 1972, p. 93Google Scholar ) and as an Egyptian delegate at the 1974–1977 Conference which led to adoption of the two Additional Protocols: see Salmon, Jean J.A., “Les guerres de libération nationale” in Cassese, Antonio (ed.), The New Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflict, Editoriale Scientifica, Naples, 1979, p. 55.Google Scholar See also the Reports by the Secretary-General entitled Respect for Human Rights in Armed Conflict, e.g. UN A/7720, 20 November 1969.

68 See Res. XXIII of 12 May 1968, Final Act of the International Conference on Human Rights, Tehran, 22 April -13 May 1968 (A/Conf. 32/41); UNGA Res. 2444 (XXIII), 13 January 1969.

69 Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field, Geneva, 12 August 1949; Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea, Geneva, 12 August 1949; Convention (III) relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949; Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949; Official Commentary to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, Jean Pictet (ed.), ICRC, Geneva, 1965.

70 Schindler, Dietrich, “State of war, belligerency, armed conflict” in Cassese, Antonio (ed.), The New Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflict, Editoriale Scientifica, Naples, 1979, pp. 3 and 8.Google Scholar

71 Ibid., pp. 9–10.

72 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), Geneva, 8 June 1977. See also Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts (Protocol II), Geneva, 8 June 1977.

73 See Protocol I, op. cit. (note 72), Art 1(4). This text was adopted in draft in 1974 by a vote of 70 in favour (22 of which were States with an Islamic majority), 21 against (0 Islamic States) and 13 abstentions (1 Islamic State). At the final vote in 1977, the same text was passed by 87 for (24), 1 against (Israel), and 11 abstentions (0): see Salmon, , op. cit. (note 67), pp. 65–66.Google Scholar The PLO was permitted to send a delegation to the conference (as were other recognized national liberation movements) and was seen by many of the Western States as the intended beneficiary of this expansion of international humanitarian law: see Aldrich, George H., “Prospects for United States ratification of Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions”, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 85, No. 1, 1991, p. 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar On the contribution by Georges Abi-Saab, Egyptian delegate, see op. cit. (note 67).

74 See, for example, Article 22 of the Palestine National Covenant, 1968, in Lukacs, Yehuda (ed.), Documents on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, 1967–83, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984, p. 142.Google Scholar

75 Protocol I, op. cit. (note 72), Arts 42–45.

76 See Salmon, , op. cit. (note 67), pp. 103–104, 108–109.Google Scholar At one point the Arab countries presented a proposal for the absolute prohibition of attacks on objects designed for civilian use, such as houses, dwellings and means of transport, irrespective of whether they were used for military purposes: see Lysaght, Charles, “The attitude of western countries” in Cassese, Antonio (ed.), The New Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflict, Editoriale Scientifica, Naples, 1979, p. 349, p. 364.Google Scholar

77 See Condorelli, Luigi, “Les pays afro-asiatiques” in Cassese, Antonio (ed.), The New Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflict, Editoriale Scientifica, Naples, 1979, p. 386, pp. 394–5.Google Scholar

78 Lukacs, , op. cit. (note 74), p. 174.Google Scholar

79 Op. cit. (note 72).

80 See Levie, Howard S. (ed.), The Law of Non-International Armed Conflict: Protocol II to the 2949 Geneva Conventions, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, 1987, p. 5Google Scholar (Egypt on compatibility of draft Protocol II with Islam), p. 65 (Saudi Arabia on compatability of Article 1 with Islamic law doctrine of full respect and protection for all human beings regardless of colour or race) and p. 301 (Saudi Arabia on penal provisions).

81 “Adoption of the red crescent by the Islamic Republic of Iran”, International Review of the Red Cross, No. 219, November-December 1980, pp. 316–317.

82 See for example Letter dated 28 lune 1984 from the Deputy Permanent Representative of Iraq to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/16649, 28 June 1984; Statement dated 17 July 1989 by the Foreign Ministry of the Islamic Republic of Iran, UN Doc. S/20470,19 July 1989, Annex.

83 See for example ICRC, Memorandum from the International Committee of the Red Cross to the States Parties to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 concerning the conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Republic of Iraq, Geneva, 7 May 1983, reprinted in Sassrôli, Marco and Bouvier, Antoine A., How Does Law Protect in War?, ICRC, Geneva, 1999, p. 978Google Scholar; and ICRC, Second Memorandum from the International Committee of the Red Cross to the States Parties to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 concerning the conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Republic of Iraq, Geneva, 10 February 1984, reprinted in ibid., p. 982; see also UN Doc. S/RES/540 (31 October 1983).

84 See Chubin, Shahram and Tripp, Charles, Iran and Iraq at War, I.B. Taurisand Company Ltd., London, 1988, p. 38.Google Scholar

85 Kelsay, , op. cit. (note 63), p. 213.Google Scholar

86 Ibid., p. 215; Chubin, and Tripp, , op. cit. (note 84), p. 60.Google Scholar

87 See for example UN Security Council Resolution 543, UN Doc. S/RES/543, 31 October 1983, para. 2.

88 Kelsay, , op. cit. (note 63), pp. 215–216.Google Scholar

89 Ibid. See also Chubin, and Tripp, , op. cit. (note 84), p. 43.Google Scholar

90 Ibid., pp. 213–214; Chubin, and Tripp, , op. cit. (note 84), pp. 40–46.Google Scholar

91 See Chubin, and Tripp, , op. cit. (note 84), p. 40.Google Scholar

92 See Prisoners of War in Iran and Iraq: The Report of a Mission Dispatched by the Secretary-General, U N Doc. S/16962, January 1985.

93 See Kelsay, , op. cit. (note 63), pp. 214–215Google Scholar; Chubin, and Tripp, , op. cit. (note 84), p. 51.Google Scholar

94 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9*, reprinted in 37 ILM 999 (1998). See generally Lee, Roy S. (ed.), The International Criminal Court: The Making of the Rome Statute: Issues, Negotiations, Results, Kluwer Law International, The Hague, 1999.Google Scholar

95 See Cate Steains, “Gender issues” in Lee, (ed.), op. cit. (note 94), p. 372.Google Scholar

96 Rome Statute, op. cit. (note 94), Arts 36(8)(iii) and 44(2). See also the comments by Algeria, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and Qatar in the 1996 Report by the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, Vol. II (Compilation of Proposals), UNGA Official Records, Fifty-first Session, Supplement no. 22A, A/51/22 (1996) at 12.

97 See Triffterer, Otto (ed.), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: Observers’ Notes, Nomos, Baden-Baden, 1999, pp. 164–165.Google Scholar

98 Steains, , op. cit. (note 95), p. 372.Google Scholar

99 Ibid.

100 Ibid.

101 Ibid., p. 374.

102 Rome Statute, op. cit. (note 94), Art. 7(3): “For the purpose of this Statute, it is understood that the term ‘gender’ refers to the two sexes, male and female, within the context of society. The term ‘gender'does not indicate any meaning different from the above.”

103 See Triffterer, , op. cit. (note 97), pp. 164–165.Google Scholar

104 See Steaines, , op. cit. (note 95) pp. 366–367.Google Scholar

105 Ibid.

106 Ibid., p. 367. Art. 7(2)(f) now provides: “‘Forced pregnancy’ means the unlawful confinement of a woman forcibly made pregnant, with the intent of affecting the ethnic composition of any population or carrying out other grave violations of international law. This definition shall not in any way be interpreted as affecting national laws relating to pregnancy.”

107 Notable in this respect is the ratification by Saudi Arabia on 28 November 2001 of the Second Additional Protocol. This is, perhaps, an important sign that at least one Islamic actor believes that interna tional humanitarian law and Islamic law can sit comfortably together, even in situations of non-international armed conflict. It may be an important indicator of the willingness of Islamic actors to engage in that conver sation of civilizations which, as I describe below, I believe lies at the heart of the future and process of IH L.

108 See generally Ereksoussi, op. cit. (note 2); Busuttil, op. cit. (note 2); Algase, op. cit. (note 2).

109 Malekian, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 36–38.Google Scholar

110 Ibid., pp. 38–41 (on criminality), 45–63 (aggression), 63–73 (war crimes), 74–75 (restricted weapons), 76–78 (crimes against humanity), 79–89 (slavery), 90–93 (genocide), 94–97 (apartheid), 98–106 (torture), 107–112 (internationally protected persons), 113–115 (hostages), 116–120 (drug offences), and 132–134 (piracy).

111 Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), pp. 390–394Google Scholar; Rechid, , op. cit. (note 11), pp. 385–386Google Scholar; El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 115–124Google Scholar; Malekian, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 135–147.Google Scholar

112 Melakian, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 154–159Google Scholar; see also Zemmali, Ameur, Combattants et prisonniers de guerre en droit islamique et en droit international humanitaire, Éditions A. Pedone, Paris, 1997Google Scholar; Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), p. 391Google Scholar, citing Abu Bakr (634 CE), p. 392 citing Marghinani; ben Achour, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 61–63Google Scholar; El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 119Google Scholar; Zemmali, , op. cit. (note 2) p. 132Google Scholar; Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 292.Google Scholar

113 See generally ben Achour, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 65Google Scholar; El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 121–124Google Scholar; Zemmali, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 131–132Google Scholar; Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 290Google Scholar; Malekian, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 149–153.Google Scholar

114 Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), p. 391Google Scholar, citing Abu Bakr (680 CE).

115 Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), p. 391Google Scholar, citing Abu Bakr; p. 392, citing Marghinani's Hidayah (1196 CE); Zemmali, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 133.Google Scholar

116 Zemmali, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 131.Google Scholar

117 Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), p. 392Google Scholar, citing Marghinani; El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2) pp. 116–118.Google Scholar

118 El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 118–119.Google Scholar

119 Taube, , op. cit. (note 8), pp. 392–3Google Scholar, citing Mahmoud el Mahboud's Vikayah (1280 CE); Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 291.Google Scholar

120 Malekian, , op. cit. (note 2), pp. 172–178.Google Scholar

121 Cf. Rechid, , op. cit. (note 11), p. 392.Google Scholar

122 See Mendelson, M.H., “The formation of customary international law”, Recueil des Cours, Vol. 272, 1998, p. 155Google Scholar, pp. 215–7; Cohen-Jonathan, G., “La coutume locale”, Annuaire français de droit international, Vol. 7, 1961, p. 119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Local customs can be bilateral (e.g. Right of Passage over Indian Territory (India v. Portugal), (1960) ICJ Reports 6 at 39), regional (as was considered in the Asylum case (Peru v. Colombia), (1950) ICJ Reports 266) or common to a “particular ideological group, or a group which shares the same policies on a specific issue, irrespective of their location”: Mendelson, , op. cit., p. 216.Google Scholar

123 Compare Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 295.Google Scholar

124 See ICJ Statute, Art 38(1)(c).

125 Compare Brown, Bartram S., “Nationality and internationality in international humanitarian law”, Stanford Journal of International Law, Vol. 34, No. 2, 1998, pp. 347–406.Google Scholar

126 Compare International Law Association, Report of the Sixty-Fifth Conference (1992), El-Fania, Cairo, 1993, p. 4Google Scholar; see also Strawson, op. cit. (note 60).

127 Compare Mahmassani, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 233.Google Scholar

128 On multivalence in the reconciliation of legal traditions, see Glenn, , op. cit. (note 4), pp. 324–327.Google Scholar

129 Lacharrière, Guy de, “Le point de vue juriste: la production et l'application du droit international dans une monde multiculturel”, in Dupuy, R.J. (ed.), L'avenir du droit international dans un monde multiculturel, Colloque, La Haye, 17–19 Novembre 1983Google Scholar, Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, 1984, p. 67.

130 Glenn, , op. cit. (note 4), p. 325Google Scholar; see also Bedjaoui, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 284.Google Scholar

131 El-Dakkak, , op. cit. (note 2), p. 125.Google Scholar

132 Compare S. Sucharitkul, “L'Humanité en tant qu'élément contribuant au développement progressif du droit international contemporain”, in Dupuy, (ed.), op. cit. (note 17), p. 415Google Scholar; R. J. Dupuy, “Conclusions du colloque“, in Dupuy, (ed.), op. cit. (note 128), p. 447, pp. 456–467.Google Scholar

133 See Glenn, , op. cit. (note 4), p. 338.Google Scholar