SOAS Research Online

Abstract

This study scrutinises the justifications and conduct of Boko Haram’s war through the lens of Islamic laws of war, aiming to ascertain the group’s legal status and the corresponding treatment it warrants. Employing desk-based Islamic legal research methods, the study elucidates the Islamic justifications for warfare (Islamic jus ad bellum) and the regulations for prosecuting hostilities (Islamic jus in bello). Social science methods were utilised to analyse Boko Haram’s reasons for fighting and its conduct in warfare. Subsequently, the study evaluated the group’s justifications and actions against the normative Islamic rules of warfare, employing “immanent critique”, which means critiquing Boko Haram using jurisprudential principles and standards accepted by it. Although immanent critique is rooted in Western theoretical concepts, its application in this study is justified by the Qur’anic principle of “hātū burhānakum”, meaning “bring your proof”, implying internal justification(s). The study concludes that Boko Haram’s war does not meet the criteria for a legitimate jihād. Beyond the absence of a valid justification and the necessary declaration by the appropriate authority, the group’s conduct during warfare violates Islamic jus in bello. Nevertheless, labelling Boko Haram’s war as hirābah (brigandage/terrorism) is erroneous because the group’s primary motive is not economic. Instead, the study concludes that different factions within Boko Haram manifest as bughāh (rebels) or khawārij (violent fanatics) at different times. Consequently, determining the status and appropriate treatment for a specific Boko Haram fighter necessitates an examination of the individual’s faction and their timeframe of involvement. Therefore, prosecutors and judges should consider these factors when deciding the treatment appropriate for individual Boko Haram fighters. The study also suggests leveraging Islamic jus in bello in humanitarian negotiations with relevant groups and identifying groups like Boko Haram as khawārij, instead of using terms like “jihadi(st)” and “Islamist”, which inaccurately imply that Islam sanctions them.