Islamic Injunctions on Prisoner’s Immunity and Termination of captivity in War: The Case Study of Afghanistan

Afghanistan remained an arena for international powers for the last two centuries. The climax period of the militant activities in this soil was from September 2001 to August 2021. Millions of human entities took part in this escalation and a large number of human fabric became captive by the detaining powers during this period. At the end of the armed climax, the emerging political & military coalition on this soil declared its stance about the method of governance after 15 August 2021 which would be based upon Islamic resources. In the perspective of this armed conflict, the question of prisoner’s immunity and termination of captivity in war attracted the attention of global powers. What options be available to prisoners of war about termination of war captivity under Islamic International Humanitarian Law (IIHL) and Conventional International Humanitarian Law (CIHL), is the mainstay of this paper. To answer the question, Islamic jurisprudence provides five methods to dissolve the detention and captivity in war. These methods are respectively freedom gratis, ransom, exchange of prisoners of war, execution, and enslavement. According to Islamic military guidance, freedom gratis remains the general practice in entire Islamic military history. Contrary to it, Ransom and exchange of prisoners of war were occasionally utilized and not the general practice in the entire military history of Islam. The execution and enslavement were pre-Islamic methods and practices. A set of Islamic injunctions were revealed to reform them (Execution & Enslavement) and hence they have been invoked as the source of reference in Islamic prudential literature. Along with, principles of conventional international humanitarian law are also associated with this discourse. Under these facts, this paper is a strenuous effort to embark on the solution of the matter which would be acceptable to all stakeholders regarding Afghanistan.