The International Humanitarian Law (IHL) is the law of armed conflicts that aims to protect human rights even during warfare, and violations by those nations or individuals under the law will lead to war crimes. As there are questions on the relations between sharia and the United Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), debates exists also on whether it is compatible with the IHL. The insistence on the inclusion of the word “Islamic” (i.e. Islamic International Humanitarian Law (IIHL) suggests that tensions between the IHL and the IIHL, or more precisely interpretations of them, exist at least in theoretical if not in practical fields.
Unfortunately, intellectual debates around the issue are not free from an apologetic approach in which both are understood in the light of “clash of civilizations”. This is understandable if we see the fact that two opposing models—traditional missionary and apologetic approaches—are still alive in Islamic studies. Rather than aiming at the substances, an apologetic approach is at the risk of uncritical, unscientific defense in an attempt to assert the superiority of Islamic civilization over the Western (Christian) one and vice versa. Another danger of such approach is its tendency toward romanticism in that sharia is considered as a “finished product” that is closed to new, contextual interpretations. Indeed, defined as ethical and moral principles, sharia is relevant with contemporary humanitarian law as it is comprised of values that are found also in the IHL such as respect for human dignity either as individuals or communities
Thus, I hope this blog can contribute to a rational and objective dialogue on Islam and International Humanitarian Law.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar