The author of al-Rawḍ al-Murbiʿ (1) says:

“Chapter on Safe-Conduct and Truce

“A grant of safe-conduct is valid when issued by a sane, willing Muslim who is not intoxicated—even if he is an owned slave or a woman—provided it entails no harm to the Muslims and is for ten years or less. It may be immediate or conditional. The imam may grant it to all polytheists; a commander may grant it to the people of a town against whom he has been appointed; and any individual may grant it to a caravan or a small fortress, according to customary practice. By it, killing, enslavement, and captivity become prohibited.”

His statement, “A grant of safe-conduct is valid”: safe-conduct means granting protection to a disbeliever for a limited period—for example, so that he may sell his merchandise and return; or so that he may observe the lands of the Muslims and return; or so that he may hear the words of Allah and return. This protection is not a contract; rather, it is simply a guarantee of safety. Hence, it may validly be granted by any person, even a woman and even an owned slave. However, the one granting protection must be a Muslim.

Thus, if we suppose that a town contains various groups—Christians and polytheists—who nevertheless remain under the covenant of the Muslims, they may not grant safe-conduct to a disbeliever entering from the lands of disbelief, because they cannot be trusted. There may be an agreement between them and this person seeking safe-conduct, so they grant him protection in order that he may come and obtain the Muslims’ secrets and information about their circumstances.

The one granting safe-conduct must also be sane; the opposite of this is insanity, for the insane person has neither reason nor deliberate intent.

He must also act willingly, not under compulsion. Thus, if an armed disbeliever enters, finds a Muslim man, and says to him, “Grant me safe-conduct, or I will kill you,” and the man grants him safe-conduct under duress, then this safe-conduct