International humanitarian law is a set of rules which seek, for humanitarian reasons, to limit the effects of armed conflict. It protects persons who are not or are no longer participating in the hostilities and restricts the means and methods of warfare. International humanitarian law is also known as the law of war or the law of armed conflict. International humanitarian law is part of international law, which is the body of rules governing relations between States. International law is contained in agreements between States – treaties or conventions – customary rules, which consist of State practise considered by them as legally binding, and in general principles. International humanitarian law applies to armed conflicts. It does not regulate whether a State may actually use force; this is governed by an important, but distinct, part of international law set out in the United Nations Charter.
Provisions related to IHL:

A major part of international humanitarian law is contained in the four Geneva Conventions of 1949. Nearly every State in the world has agreed to be bound by them. The Conventions have been developed and supplemented by two further agreements: the Additional Protocols of 1977 relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts. Other agreements prohibit the use of certain weapons and military tactics and protect certain categories of people and goods. These agreements include:
The 1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, plus its two protocols; The 1972 Biological Weapons
Convention; the 1980 Conventional Weapons Convention and its five protocols; the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention; the 1997 Ottawa Convention on
Anti-personnel mines; the 2000 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. Many provisions of international humanitarian law are now accepted as customary law – that is, as general rules by which all States are bound.

Islamic humanitarian law:
Muslims can take just pride in the fact that Islam established the sanctity of life, Honour, and property in times of war, and made rules for the conduct of war and ensured their enforcement, centuries before the West declared them to exist in the various present-day international instruments.
Islam has laid down a set of humanitarian laws, Along with principles now incorporated in the Geneva Conventions; Islamic law contains provisions not yet incorporated in modern international instruments. For instance, the protections provided by the Conventions are in the nature of multilateral treaties. Islam provides all these protections unilaterally. Similarly, the Conventions allow the detaining state to exact labour from those prisoners of war that are below officer rank. According to Islamic law, no labour can be exacted from the captives.
Initial Body of Islamic humanitarian law:
The initial body of Islamic humanitarian law, which consisted of the injunctions given in the Quran and the Traditions of the Prophet, was further developed and elaborated by the Muslim jurists. Islamic humanitarian law is more comprehensive and equitable than any set of modern treaties on this issue.
Islam firstly describes when a war can be fought and then what are laws relating to war(how Muslims should conduct in battle field).Islam has recognized rights of Non-combatants.
Commencement of war:
Islam had clearly laid down the circumstances in which war can b fought .There are three basic objectives for commencement of war
 Protecting the Islamic ideology and doctrine
 Helping oppressed
 Repelling aggression and protecting Islam
But at the same time its is said that try to avoid the war and sort out the matters peacefully as The Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) said do not wish for an encounter with the enemy; Pray to Allah to grant you
security; but when you (have to) encounter them, exercise patience, and you
should know that Paradise is under the shadow of the swords.
And if we see the Quranic verses we will find that emphasis is given on to avoid the conflict not on to made the conflict
Conflict should be avoided if possible:
But turn away from them and say “Peace!” (43:89)
But if the enemies incline towards peace, do you also incline towards peace. And
trust in Allah! For He is the one who hears and knows all things. (8:61)
… take not life which Allah has made sacred, except by way of justice and law:
thus He commands you that you may learn wisdom. (6:151)
… If anyone killed a person not in retaliation for murder or for his spreading evil
in the land, it would be as if he killed the whole of mankind. And if anyone
saved a life, it would be as if he saved the whole of mankind (5:32).
Permission is given to fight in self-defense:
According to Quran if war is imposed on Muslims they must not show back and they should fight for self-defense as laid down in Surah AL-hajj
“To those against whom war is made, permission is given to fight, because they
are wronged; and verily Allah is most powerful for their aid. They are those who
have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right – (for no cause) except
that they did say “Our Lord is Allah”. Did not Allah check one set of people by
means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries,
Churches, synagogues and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated
in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid His
(Cause) for verily Allah is full of strength, exalted in might. “22:39-40)
Fighting is not to be desired, but taking no action in the face of oppression, may be a worse choice:
Tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter. (2:217)
Muslims have a duty to assist other Muslims who are the victims of
aggression:
And what is the matter with you that you do not fight in the cause of Allah and
for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women and children
whose only cry is: “Our Lord, rescue us from this town whose people are
oppressors, and raise for us, from you, one who will protect, and raise for us,
from you one who will help” (4:75)
It is prohibited to fight those with whom you have a treaty or those who
wish to make peace:
Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace)
or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as
well as fighting their own people. If God had pleased, He could have given them
power over you, and they would have fought you. Therefore if they withdraw
from you and fight you not, and send you (guarantees of peace) then God has
opened no way for you (to fight them) (4:90)
Rules about Declaration of War:
It has been laid down in the Holy Quran: "If you apprehend
breach of treaty from a people, then openly throw the treaty at their
faces" (8:58). In this verse, Muslims have been prohibited from opening
hostilities against their enemies without properly declaring war against
them, unless of course, the adversary has already started aggression
against them. Otherwise the Quran has clearly given the injunction to
Muslims that they should intimate to their enemies that no treaty exists
between them, and they are at war with them. The present day 'inter-
national law' has also laid down that hostilities should not be started
without declaration of war, but since it is a man-made rule, they are
free to violate it whenever it is convenient. On the other hand, the laws
for Muslims have been framed by God, hence they cannot be violated. Prohibition of Breach of Treaties:
Islam has strictly prohibited treachery. One of the instructions
that the Prophet used to give to the Muslim warriors while sending
them to the battlefront was: "Do not be guilty of breach of faith."
This order has been repeated in the Holy Quran and the hadith again
and again, that if the enemy acts treacherously let him do so, you
should never go back on your promise. There is a famous incident in
the peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah, when after the settlement of the
terms of the treaty, Abu Jandal, the son of the emissary of the
unbelievers who had negotiated this treaty with the Muslims, came,
fettered and blood-stained, rushing to the Muslim camp and crying for
help. The Prophet told him "Since the terms of the treaty have been
settled, we are not in a position to help you out. You should go back
with your father. God will provide you with some other opportunity to
escape this persecution." The entire Muslim army was deeply touched
and grieved at the sad plight of Abu Jandal and many of them were
moved to tears. But when the Prophet declared that "We cannot break
the agreement", not even a single person came forward to help the
unfortunate prisoner, so the unbelievers forcibly dragged him back to
Makkah. This is an unparalleled example of the observance of the terms
of agreement by the Muslims, and Islamic history can show many
examples of a similar nature.
The Rights of the Non-Combatants:
Islam has first drawn a clear line of distinction between the
combatants and the non-combatants of the enemy country. As far as
the non-combatant population is concerned such as women, children,
the old and the infirm, etc., the instructions of the Prophet are as
follows: "Do not kill any old person, any child or any woman" (Abu
Dawud). "Do not kill the monks in monasteries" or "Do not kill the
people who are sitting in places of worship" (Musnad of Ibn Hanbal).
During a war, the Prophet saw the corpse of a woman lying on the
ground and observed: "She was not fighting. How then she came to be
killed?" From this statement of the Prophet the exegetists and jurists
have drawn the principle that those who are non-combatants should not
be killed during or after the war.

The Rights of the Combatants:
Islam has conferred rights of combatants and Muslims r bound to obey these rules and rights.
1. Torture with Fire:
In the hadith there is a saying of the Prophet that: "Punishment by
fire does not behoove anyone except the Master of the Fire" (Abu
Dawud). The injunction deduced from this saying is that the adversary
should not be burnt alive.
2. Protection of the Wounded:
Do not attack a wounded person"-thus said the Prophet. This
means that the wounded soldiers who are not fit to fight, nor actually
fighting, should not be attacked.
3. The Prisoner of War should not be slain:
"No prisoner should be put to the sword"-a very clear and
unequivocal instruction given by the Prophet Muhammad.(PBUH). Quran had also laid down rules for prisoners of war in Surah Muhammad, Surah Al-Anfal, and Surah Ad-Dahr.
Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers (in battle), smite at their necks. At
length, when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them):
Thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom. (47:4)
O Apostle, say to those who are captives in your hands: “If Allah finds any good
in your hearts, He will give you something better than what has been taken from
you, and He will forgive you: for Allah is oft-forgiving, most merciful.” (8:70)
And they (the believers) feed, for the love of Allah, the indigent, the orphan and
the captive. (76:8)
The Quran does not require Muslims to “turn the other cheek” when attacked,
but it does require them not to exceed the limits of proper conduct of war, when war is justified.
4. No one should be tied to be killed:

"The Prophet has prohibited the killing of anyone who is tied or
is in captivity."

5. No Looting and Destruction in the Enemy's Country:
Muslims have also been instructed by the Prophet that if they
should enter the enemy's territory, they should not indulge in pillage or
plunder nor destroy the residential areas, nor touch the property of
anyone except those who are fighting with them. It has been narrated
in the hadith: "The Prophet has prohibited the believers from loot and
plunder" (al-Bukhari; Abu Dawud). His injunction is: "The loot is no
more lawful than the carrion" (Abu Dawud). Abu Bakr al-Siddiq used
to instruct the soldiers while sending them to war, "Do not destroy the
villages and towns, do not spoil the cultivated fields and gardens, and
do not slaughter the cattle." The booty of war which is acquired from
the battleground is altogether different from this. It consists of the
wealth, provisions and equipment captured only from the camps and
military headquarters of the combatant armies.
6. Sanctity of Property:
The Muslims have also been prohibited from taking anything from
the general public of a conquered country without paying for it. If in a
war the Muslim army occupies an area of the enemy country, and is
encamped there, it does not have the right to use the things belonging
to the people without their consent. If they need anything, they should
purchase it from the local population or should obtain permission from
the owners. Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, while instructing the Muslim armies
being despatched to the battlefront would go to the extent of saying
that Muslim soldiers should not even use the milk of the milch cattle
without the permission of their owners.
7. Sanctity of a Dead Body:
Islam has categorically prohibited its followers from disgracing or
mutilating the corpses of their enemies as was practised in Arabia
before the advent of Islam. It has been said in the hadith: "The Prophet
has prohibited us from mutilating the corpses of the enemies" (al-
Bukhari; AbC Dawud). The occasion on which this order was given is
highly instructive. In the Battle of Uhud the disbelievers mutilated the
bodies of the Muslims, who had fallen on the battlefield and sacrificed
their lives for the sake of Islam, by cutting off their ears and noses, and
threading them together to put round their necks as trophies of war.
The abdomen of Hamzah, the uncle of the Prophet, was ripped open by
Quraysh, his liver was taken out and chewed by Hind, the wife of Abu
Sufyan, the leader of the Meccan army. The Muslims were naturally
enraged by this horrible sight. But the Prophet asked his followers not
to mete out similar treatment to the dead bodies of the enemies. This
great example of forbearance and restraint is sufficient to convince any
reasonable man who is not blinded by prejudice or bias, that Islam is
really the religion sent down by the Creator of the universe, and that if
human emotions had any admission in Islam, then this horrible sight on
the battlefield of Uhud would have provoked the Prophet to order his
followers to mutilate the bodies of their enemy in the same manner.


8. Return of Corpses of the Enemy:
In the Battle of hzab a very renowned and redoubtable warrior
of the enemy was killed and his body fell down in the trench which the
Muslims had dug for the defence of Medina. The unbelievers presented
ten thousand dinars to the Prophet and requested that the dead body of
their fallen warrior may be handed over to them. The Prophet replied
"I do not sell dead bodies. You can take away the corpse of your fallen
comrade."
The opinions of the medieval jurists:
During the years of expansion of the empires of the Muslims, considerable
consideration was given to the rules of war by the jurists, and not surprisingly,
there were various differences of opinion between them. In their legal treatises
they expressed opinions on such matters as the treatment of prisoners of war,
the types of weapons which might be allowed, what types of damage might
legitimately be inflicted on combatants and their property and similar issues.
Al-Mawadi’s work, Al-Akham as-Sultaniyyah (The Laws of Islamic
Governance) from the 11th century CE devoted a chapter to rules of jihad. Some
of these rules related to the organization of the army, and the duties of the
commander and some to the division of captured booty and the rules of
conduct of warfare.
Rulings about warfare are also contained in other classical texts, such
as An Nawawi’s Minhaj et Taliban (a classical text of the Shafii school), dealt
with, among other things, the treatment of prisoners of war. It stated:
Of the enemy fighters taken prisoner, the amir may decide, according to circumstances
whether to:
• Kill them
• Give them their liberty
• Exchange them for Muslim prisoners of war
• Release them for a ransom
• Reduce them to slavery
According to Shaybani, Abu Hanifa permitted the use of catapults and flooding
to defeat the enemy, and allowed other methods which had been frowned on
by other jurists. New enemies and new ways of waging war were reflected in
new interpretations of the traditional rules. This process continues.

Precedents from history of Islam:
The Prophet, the pious Caliphs, and later Muslim rulers strictly followed the rules of Islamic humanitarian law. The Prophet used to instruct his commanding officers and soldiers about war ethics. He would particularly emphasis on treating the captives with dignity and kindness. Caliph Abu Bakar’s instructions to his military commanders, regarding behavior of troops, are also well known.

In 638, when Jerusalem was first conquered by the Muslims, Caliph Omar Bin Khattab made this declaration, which displays the humanity of the victors: “I grant them security of lives, their possessions, their children, their churches, their crosses, and all that belongs to them.... Their churches shall not be impoverished, nor destroyed; neither endowments, nor their dignity.... Neither shall the inhabitants of Jerusalem be exposed to violence in following their religion; nor shall one of them be injured.”
The case of Qutaibah bin Muslim also demonstrates the strict discipline and control under which the Muslim armies were kept. A delegation from Samarqand met Caliph Omar bin Abdul Aziz and complained that Qutaibah, commander of the Muslim army, had unjustifiably stationed the troops in their town. Omar ordered the governor of Samarqand to appoint a judge to adjudicate upon the matter. A Muslim judge was appointed and an inquiry was made as per the instructions of the Caliph. In the light of the evidence obtained, the judge, Jami ibn Hadhir Albaji, pronounced that the Muslim army must vacate the city immediately. He also declared that the sudden attack on the city, without any warning, was a violation of the Islamic law.
Imagine. An army conquers a city and enters it. The inhabitants complain to the victorious government; its judge decides the matter against the victorious army and orders it to vacate the city. Can history point out any war in which the troops kept themselves so strictly bound by the moral code?

In 1187, the capture of Jerusalem by Sultan Salahuddin Ayubi and the excellent behavior of his troops is another classic example of Islamic war ethics. In fact, during the Crusades, various European writers recorded their surprise at the noble conduct of the Muslims on the field of battle. Oliverus Scholastics tells how the Sultan Al-Malik Al-Kamil provided a defeated Frankish army with food: “Who could doubt that such goodness, friendship and charity come from God? Men whose parents, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters had died in agony at our hands, whose lands we took, whom we drove naked from their homes, revived us with their own food when we were dying of hunger and showered us with kindness even when we were in their power.”
The Muslims also maintained the same morality while retreating from a territory. In 634, the Muslim army made a strategic retreat from the Hams, Damascus, and other cities to consolidate its strength to repel the army of Heraclius. The retreating army, unlike other contemporary armies, not only left the citizens and their possessions absolutely unhurt, but also returned the tax collected from the inhabitants.

Thus, we see that the nature of war in Islam is that of an extraordinary measure. As long as pacific means are available for settlement of disputes and issues, war is prohibited. Even when war becomes permissible, for the sake of self-defence, etc., Muslim troops are not given a freehand. While conducting hostilities, they must observe the above mentioned rules.

Many people are even unaware that Islam has unilaterally banned the use of chemical, biological, nuclear, and other weapons of mass destruction, by prohibiting cruel ways of killing, killing of non-combatants, destruction of vegetation, etc. Here it must also be mentioned that the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Centre and the recent kidnappings, torture, and killings of foreign aid workers in Iraq are absolutely un-Islamic. The perpetrators are criminals not only under international law, but also under Islamic law.

Ethics of warfare:
Summarizing Islamic ethics of warfare we can say that islam has prohibited following acts during war
(1) Starting war without formal ultimatum;
(2) Cruel ways of killing;
(3) Killing of non-combatants;
(4) Killing of prisoners of war;
(5) Killing of envoys;
(6) Massacre in the conquered territory;
(7) Dishonoring of women and childeren
(8) Inhumane treatment of prisoners of war;
(9) Punishing prisoners of war for acts of belligerency;
(10) Mutilation of dead bodies;
(11) Destruction of crops, trees, and other natural resources;
(12) Plundering and looting;
(13) Charging the prisoners of war for their maintenance;
(14) Depriving the conquered population of their possessions, interfering in their religious practices, forcing them to convert to Islam, and denying or restricting their legal and equitable rights.

It must be noted that the observance of these rules is incumbent upon every Muslim soldier, commander, and ruler. Anyone who commits a violation of these norms is guilty of an offence under Islamic law.

Islam and international humanitarian law:

In a world increasingly portrayed as beset by the ‘clash of civilizations’,
especially between the West and Islam, the universality of international
Humanitarian law (IHL) is increasingly threatened.
the modern interaction between Islamic and Western
civilizations has played an important part in shaping humanitarian law as we
now know it. Looking to this historical interaction, it attempts to identify a
mode of understanding humanitarian law that accommodates different ‘civilizations’.
This historical approach also avoids the pitfalls of the comparative
analysis approach: it allows shifts in sub-traditions to emerge, and prevents
us from assuming that either system stands in a privileged position.
The innovative influence of Islam on European laws and customs
of war stretches back at least as far as the Crusades. Delivering a course
at the Hague Academy of International Law in 1926, Baron de Taube
speculated that the modern public international law of declarations of
war was a direct descendant of Islamic doctrine, having passed into
chivalric codes during the Crusades, through the Christian church and on into the modern law of war. Christopher Weeramantry has also offered
evidence of the influence of Islamic doctrine in the writings of Hugo Grotius
on the law of combat.
Islam and Islamic players are widely but incorrectly assumed to
have had an insignificant role in the early development of international
Humanitarian law. From the entry of the Ottoman Empire into the European
States’ legal system in 1856 until the first Hague Peace Conference in 1899,
Islamic players assumed only a minor role in the burgeoning development of
the public international law of warfare. On close inspection, that role is
revealed as highly significant in both the internationalization and humanization
of the European law of war
developed and reduce to relieve With the advent of modern warfare and changing patterns of conflict, IHL was human suffering in times of conflict.
Islamic law and humanitarian law share a common base and have more similarities than differences. In sum, the two doctrines agree on the sanctity of life, the preservation of human dignity and compassion towards enemy captives
Islamic rules also lay out comprehensive guidelines for the protection of non-combatants, which are similar to the provisions enshrined in IHL. One such shared provision is the importance of a sanctuary within war zone. Similarly, both laws strongly advocate humane treatment of the enemy. Interestingly, Islamic law also provides for the provision of water to enemy camp. The treatment of prisoners of war also clearly outlined in Islam as it is the IHL, both advocating compassion to the captured enemy. There is also coherence between the two systems of law over treatment of medical personnel, women and children, the injured, the missing, the dead and displaced people.
Islam prohibits immorality, humiliation, neglect and excesses the dignity of human beings, even when committed against the enemy. Collateral damage, too, is covered by the Shari’a, prescribing compensation for loss of life and property to non-combatants, either Muslims or non Muslims so long as it does not conflict with the Shari’a. Islamic law has greater primacy for Muslims as it is a matter of their faith that allows no room for deviation. However, the realization that there are more similarities between IHL and Islamic law than differences in both content and spirit remains.-Muslims, in the course of a conflict. Ethnic cleansing is also strictly prohibited by Islam, as all races are the creation of God — another common ground with IHL.
Bridging differences
Despite its many overlaps with the Islamic law, Muslim scholars maintained that IHL is a man-made law and only acceptable to Muslims so long as it does not conflict with the Shari ‘a. Islamic law has greater primacy for Muslims as it is a matter of their faith that allows no room for deviation. However, the realization that there are more similarities between IHL and Islamic law than differences in both content and spirit.
Conclusion:
This is a brief sketch of those rights which fourteen hundred years
ago Islam gave to man, to those who were at war with each other and to
the citizens of its state, which every believer regards as sacred as law.
On the one hand, it refreshes and strengthens our faith in Islam when
we realize that even in this modern age which makes such loud claims
of progress and enlightenment, the world has not been able to produce
juster and more equitable laws than those given 1400 years ago. On the
other hand it hurts one's feelings that Muslims are in possession of such
a splendid and comprehensive system of law and yet they look forward
for guidance to those leaders of the West who could not have dreamed
of attaining those heights of truth and justice which was achieved a long
time ago. Even more painful than this is the realization that throughout
the world the rulers who claim to be Muslims have made disobedience
to their God and the Prophet as the basis and foundation of their
government. May God have mercy on them and give them the true
guidance.