جنگی حالات میں جاسوسوں سے متعلق شرعی احکام: قرائن و شواہد کی بنیاد پر فیصلہ سازی کا جواز"

Islamic Rulings Regarding Spies in Wartime: The Legitimacy of DecisionMaking Based on Circumstantial Evidence and Indicators"    DOI:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17364454

Abstract

This study examines the Islamic judicial decision regarding spies during war, and its validity in decision 
making on the basis of circumstantial evidence (qarā’in) and testimonies. The espionage is classified in 
classical Islamic jurisprudence as an extreme betrayal (khiyahanah) that can jeopardize the life and 
safety of the state as well as the citizens. The Quran and Sunnah do not permit spying and especially 
infidelity in terms of trust and support of enemy. Nevertheless, the Islamic jurists like al-Sarakhsi, Ibn 
Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim highlighted that in special cases, good and sound circumstantial 
evidence could be a valid basis of judicial decisions particularly in cases where there is no first-hand 
testimony or confession. The paper discusses the classical paradigm of evidence under Islamic law, in 
which testimony (shahada), confession (iqrar), and corroborative indications are regarded as instruments 
of evidence. It also shows the dogmatic disagreements between the four Sunni schools of law on the 
punishment of spies, between execution and discretionary (ta‘zīrī) punishment. Special emphasis is put 
on the works of Ibn Taymiyyah, al-Siyasah al-Shar‘iyyah, and that of Ibn al-Qayyim, al-Turuq al
Hukmiyyah, which highlights the importance of powerful circumstantial indicators in the context of 
justice and the protection of the common good. The study is also about the influences of the practice of 
prophecy and history that formed the law on the meaning of espionage by using the example of Ḥātib 
ibn Abī Balta‘ah. Besides this, the work also interacts with such recent issues as digital espionage, 
internet surveillance, the acceptability of new technological evidence like electronic recordings and 
computer patterns. Through juxtaposition of Islamic values with the principles of international 
humanitarian law, specifically the Geneva Conventions, the study indicates some areas of convergence 
and divergence in the treatment of spies in the context of armed conflict. The results indicate that 
Islamic jurisprudence is naturally flexible and can accommodate contemporary means of evidence, as 
long as these are not subjected to forgery and manipulation. The paper concludes decision using strong 
circumstantial evidence is not only permissible but required in times of warfare that is due to the nature 
of espionage that is clandestine. Finally, the study highlights the timeless applicability of Islamic law 
to modern security challenges without violating justice, fairness, and exalted values of Sharia (maqasid 
al-sharieah).