SHARIAsource

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Kyrgyz Republic/Kyrgyzstan (Kyrgyz Respublikasy), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Kyrgyzstan's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has no legal status. 

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the State of Eritrea (Hagere Ertra), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Eritrea's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has some legal status. 

On 25 March 1984, the plaintiff and first defendant married. They lived in Makassar and had six children. On 18 May 2011, the first defendant married the second defendant, unbeknownst to the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed that, as the first defendant was a state university lecturer assisted by the Indonesian Muslim University Waqf Foundation (Yayasan Wakaf UMI), he was obliged to first obtain his first wife's permission before marrying another person. Moreover, because he had not, his marriage to the second defendant contravened Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and should therefore be rendered null and void by the court.

Despite both defendants failing to attend the proceeding, the court acceded to the plaintiff's application, dissolving the marriage between the two defendants on the grounds that the first defendant had not first sought the permission of the plaintiff. The plaintiff was ordered to pay costs (IDR 571,000).

The parties were married on 4 August 1991 and had two children. The marriage became quarrelsome, however, after the plaintiff:

1. learned that the defendant had married another person, unbeknownst to the plaintiff;
2. was pushed to the ground by the defendant, injuring her back and hip; and
3. was threatened at gunpoint by the defendant.

While the plaintiff sought an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughro), the defendant vehemently denied the plaintiff's allegations, submitting that the parties' homelife was still harmonious and quarrel-free.

The court, however, on the evidence, acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

This fatwa declares the United States-led invasion of Iraq to be despotic, illegal and a repudiation of both Islamic and international law. It describes the invasion as indiscriminate and brutal, resulting in the death of women, children and the elderly, as well as the destruction of various public facilities. Moreover, that the invasion was disproportionate and gravely violated people's human rights. The fatwa states that the persons responsible must be tried as aggressors and war-mongers before an international court, and must repair the damage they have caused. The fatwa also states that prior to the invasion Iraq was a sovereign state meaning that the new government administration now represents the rights of the Iraqi people.

This fatwa defines joint prayers as prayers conducted jointly and simultaneously between Muslims and non-Muslims in official state and societal events, either with one or several people praying while the others assent, or with everyone praying together according to their own religion. The fatwa also states that assenting (pronouncing 'amen') to a prayer is considered praying.

The fatwa states that such joint prayers are not recognised in Islam and are therefore considered bid'ah (innovation). Specifically, it is forbidden (haram) for Muslims to participate in joint prayers:

1. where a leader of each religion takes it in turns to lead the prayer;
2. led by a non-Muslim; and
3. conducted simultaneously with non-Muslims.

It is permissible (mubah), however, if the leader of the prayer is Muslim or if every person prays in accordance with their own religion.

This fatwa acknowledges and praises pre-existing state dignitary religious activities, while imploring state dignitaries, government officials, and public leaders to more actively pioneer activities related to worship (ibadat) by, for example:

1. holding religious study events and courses for personal use, for collegial purposes, for familial purposes at people's homes, and religious lectures at people's places of work;
2. holding Friday prayers (shalat Jum'at) and ceremonies for significant days in the Islamic calendar at people's places of work; and
3. collecting books on Islam in Indonesian and other languages for the purposes of creating libraries in people's places of work and their homes.

The applicant submitted that he and his wife were married on 18 April 1996 and had three children. When the applicant went to make the necessary arrangements for his third child's birth certificate, however, he encountered difficulties because his name on his marriage certificate differed from the name on his residence card, family card, and the birth certificate of his second child. In order to overcome this problem and have his third child's birth certificate issued, the applicant requested a court determination stating that he was the person in all the aforementioned official documents.

The court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds that changing one's name is appropriate provided such a request is made in good faith. In accordance with the applicant's request, the court also ordered the applicant to register his change of name with a marriage registrar at the Blitar Religious Affairs Office.

The accused allegedly facilitated gambling for other persons, contrary to arts 6 and 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003 on Gambling. Items used in the prohibited activities included one mobile phone, two bingo (togel) sheets were written, and IDR 3 million in cash. In finding the accused guilty of the offence, the court acknowledged that Allah prohibits every Muslim from gambling, as contained in Qur'anic verses 90 and 91 in Surah Almaidah. The court, pursuant to art 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003, initially prescribed seven strokes of the cane but, in light of time already served in detention, as prescribed in art 23(2) and (3) of Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, reduced the punishment to six strokes.

Plaintiffs, Muslim prisoners, sued the Massachusetts Department of Corrections, alleging violations of state and federal law, including the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, § 1983, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). Plaintiffs alleged that being patted down by female prison guards violated their First Amendment free exercise rights inasmuch as it contravened the tenets of their Islamic faith, which forbids intimate contact between unrelated members of the opposite gender. The Court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment for most of the claims, but denied it with respect to the RLUIPA and the Massachusetts General Law claims, concluding that a jury would best be able to determine whether the alleged infraction violated the terms of these two statutes.

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the State of Qatar (Dawlat Qatar), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Qatar's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) is a primary source of legislation. 

This fatwa acknowledges the scourge of terrorism that has recently affected many countries, including Indonesia. It also acknowledges the perceptions held by some that terrorism reflects Islamic techings, that Muslims should be approached with caution, and that acts of terror constitute jihad.

The fatwa considers that terrorism, according to Islamic fiqh, constitutes piracy/unlawful warfare (hirabah). It determines that terrorism is a crime against humanity and civilisation that constitutes a serious threat towards state sovereignty and security, to world peace, as well as to societal welfare. It is transnational organised crime that can be categorised as an extraordinary and indiscriminate crime.

The fatwa distinguishes between terrorism and jihad, stating that terrorism is:

1. designed to cause damage (ifsad) and anarchy/chaos (faudha);
2. intended to create fear and destroy others; and
3. conducted without regulation and limits.

Meanwhile, it states that jihad:

1. brings about improvements (ishlah), albeit via warfare;
2. intends to enforce the religion of Allah and/or defend the rights of the oppressed; and
3. is conducted pursuant to regulations specified by shari'a with a clear enemy in mind.

Legally, the fatwa states that acts of terror are forbidden (haram), while acts of jihad are obligatory (wajib). Persons that commit suicide do so for personal reasons and are pessimists, while martyrs do so as a victim for their religion and the Muslim people, with the intent of obtaining the mercy and pleasure of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala. Suicide bombing is, therefore, forbidden (haram), regardless of whether it is committed in a peaceful area or in a warzone. Martyrdom, however, is permitted.

 This is a bill proposed in the Wisconsin legislature that aims to prohibit courts and other adjudicative bodies from considering foreign law in making decisions, provided that the fundamental right of the person against whom foreign law is being applied is violated. 

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Republic of Indonesia (Republik Indonesia), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Indonesia's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has no legal status. However, one province—Aceh Province—has established Islamic law formally within its jurisdiction.

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Republic of Iraq (Jumhuriyat al Iraq/Komar-i Eraq), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Iraq's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) is a principle source of legislation. 

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Republic of Djibouti (Republique de Djibouti/Jumhuriyat Jibuti), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Djibouti's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has legal status. 

This regional regulation prohibits promiscuity, vagrancy, and begging, stating that such behaviour is contrary to religion, customary norms, and societal culture, as well as constituting a threat to health through the spread of HIV/AIDS and other diseases. Specifically, it prohibits any act that facilitates prostitution (art 2). Contravention thereof may result in a fine of up to IDR 10 million, however, fines are issued based on the number of times the person in question has committed such an offence (art 5).

This regional regulation states that the ability to read the Qur'an is one way of truly knowing and comprehending the contents of the Qur'an, thereby developing one's personality as a Muslim (art 2). Proficiency in Qur'anic recitation also operates to engender devotion to Allah SWT, and to build a peaceful, hopeful, and loving family (keluarga sakinah, mawaddah, wa rahmah) (art 4). The regulation requires all primary, middle, and high school students, as well as prospective brides and bridegrooms, to be able to read the Qur'an correctly (art 6).

This regional regulation is an example of a legislative instrument that, arguably, Islamises public life in Indonesia, but makes no specific reference to Islam or religion (agama). It prohibits all persons and entities from producing, packaging, and distributing alcoholic beverages, unless permission has first been obtained from the Tebo Regent (art 2(1)). The regulation also prohibits alcohol points of sale from being within a 500m radius of places of worship, schools, hospitals, residential areas, and office blocks (art 4(2)). It also specifies that alcohol may only be consumed in licensed establishments (art 5).

In its preambular statement, this regional regulation states that the consumption of alcohol is contrary to religious teachings, ethics, and morality, and is even considered a social illness by society. Accordingly, the regulation prohibits all persons and legal entities from producing, selling, purchasing, circulating, storing and consuming all types of alcoholic beverages, whether they be industrially-processed or a traditional type of alcoholic beverage (art 2). Contravention of this provision carries a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment or IDR 50 million (art 6(1)).