احادیث ِنزو لِ مسیح ابن مریم علیہما السلام میں قادیانیوں کی تاویلات کا تنقیدی جائزہ A Critical Review of Interpretations of Qādiyānies in Aḥadīth of Nuzūl Al-Masīḥ Ibn e Maryam (علیہما السلام)

The negation of the crucifixion and murder of Maseeh علیہ السلام and the ascension to heaven are mentioned in the Holy Qur'an and the revelation to the earth is mentioned in the authentic Ahadith. The Holy Qur'an and Hadith do not contradict each other on the ascension and revelation of Maseeh علیہ السلام. Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani interpret those thirty verses of the Holy Qur'an are about the death of Maseeh علیہ السلام which have nothing to do with his death. The Hadiths of the revelation of Maseehعلیہ السلام benefit from the Holy Qur'an, not derived from any Ijtihad or Israelism. The word death is not mentioned for Essa علیہ السلام in the Holy Qur'an. It is not possible for the Hadith to describe the return of Essa علیہ السلام to earth before the Day of Judgment and let his death be mentioned in the Holy Qur'an. Otherwise, instead of stating the meaning of Holy Qur'an, the Hadith will contradict the Qur'an. The Qur'an mentions the ascension of Essa علیہ السلام to heaven and the Hadith describes the revelation to the earth. There is not a single Hadith that indicates that Essa علیہ السلام refers to Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian and his descent means that is born from the mothes’s womb, or it is a descent as buroz (بروزی).

War on Terror and the Law of Armed Conflict: Legal Aspects and Implications

The acts of terrorism committed by non-state actors on September 11, 2001 were promptly responded by the use of force against Afghanistan, thus, commencing the ‘war on terror.’ This thesis sets out the essential components of the international legal framework i.e. jus ad bellum and jus in bello against which the September 11 attacks and the lawfulness of measures taken in response, thereto, fall to be assessed. The main emphasis remains on relevant laws in relation to the responsibility for 9/11 terrorist attacks, lawful constraints on the use of force in self-defense, limitations on conduct of hostilities under the humanitarian principles and safeguards provided by law-enforcement paradigm to protect basic human rights. This study is, therefore, to highlight the existence of international legal regime capable of addressing the events such as September 11 and governing the responses to that. It enquires the compatibility of the ‘war on terror’ with the legal framework provided by international law especially the Law of Armed Conflict in order to find out the legitimacy of use of force in preemptive self-defense, conduct of military operations to prevent transnational terrorism, targeted killings, collateral damage, detention operations and prosecution procedures. It also refers to the implications for states responsible for noncompliance to the law and subsequently for international rule of law. In this regard, the study explores that interpretation of the law is significant that regulates the state-based rationale behind compliance or noncompliance to the law. If there is a state-will to focus on humanitarian protection of individuals then rationale is more related to the applicability of the law, and if a state uses its influence and powerful status to achieve political-military objectives then rationale is less concerned about the rule of law. This proposition constitutes the threshold of applicability of the law in the ‘war on terror'' and eventually leads to the conclusion that unilateral use of force to counter terrorism is not a viable solution rather it obscures international law as a legal framework in such military operations. This thesis, thus, maintains that the existing international norms and standards can only establish the rule of law, if states interpret the law in its simplest form, apply it regardless of their vested interests and pay due respect to international legal regime.