The paper initially indicates that Islamic jurisprudence enchase terminology equivalent to the more recent term "Civilians". Among such terms are: non-fighters, those militarized infidels whose killing is prohibited; military personnel being infidels belonging to a state infidel, in war with Muslims.

For an infidel to be labelled "military", it is not a must that he be a fighter or warrior for some are such, and some are not (such as women and children). Jurists (scholars) have agreed to the legality of killing any infidel fighting Muslims in any form of real or moral war, such as supplying arms, money or information; the ultimate objective being to head off harm to an Islamic society.

Scholars have two main verdicts as to what is meant by non­fighting militarized civilians; the first confines these to women, children, and envoys only; while the second extends it to all who do not fight for physical or conventional considerations. This second definition is the sum total of contemporary international interpretations.

Included in

Jurisprudence Commons