Editing Sharia (section)

== Contemporary applications ==
{{main|Application of Sharia by country}}
According to [[human rights group]]s, some of the classical Sharia practices involve serious violations of basic human rights, gender equality and freedom of expression, and the practices of countries governed by Sharia are criticized.<ref name="Gontowska, Luiza Maria 2005"/> The [[European Court of Human Rights]] in Strasbourg (ECtHR) ruled in several cases that Sharia is "incompatible with the fundamental principles of [[democracy]]".<ref>See ''Refah Partİsİ (The Welfare Party) And Others V. Turkey'' (Applications nos. 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98), Judgment, Strasbourg, 13 February 2003, No. 123 (siehe S. 39): "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy, since principles such as pluralism in the political sphere and the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it and a regime based on sharia clearly diverges from Convention values"; see Alastair Mowbray, ''Cases, Materials, and Commentary on the European Convention on Human Rights'', OUP Oxford, 2012, p 744, [https://books.google.com/books?id=XWyq09yJho8C&pg=PA744 Google-Books preview].</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Janisch |first=Wolfgang |title=EuGH – Gegen Scheidungen nach Scharia-Recht |url=https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/europaeischer-gerichtshof-gegen-scheidungen-nach-scharia-recht-1.3666617 |access-date=2023-02-03 |website=Süddeutsche.de |date=14 September 2017 |language=de}}</ref> "[[Human rights|Human rights concept]]" have been categorically excluded by the governments of countries such as [[Iran]] and [[Saudi Arabia]] under Sharia, claiming that it belongs to [[secular]] and western values,<ref name="Gontowska, Luiza Maria 2005"/> while the [[Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam|Cairo conference]] by the [[Organisation of Islamic Cooperation]] declared that human rights can only be respected if they are compatible with Islam.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://rwi.lu.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2020-OIC-Declaration-of-Human-Rights.pdf | title=OIC declaration on human rights: changing the name or a paradigm change? | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231007022132/https://rwi.lu.se/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2020-OIC-Declaration-of-Human-Rights.pdf | archive-date=7 October 2023 }} </ref>

[[File:Use of Sharia by country updated.svg|upright=1.35|thumb|Use of sharia by country:<br />
{{legend|#706EA4|Sharia influences family and criminal laws.}}
{{legend|#F6DD4F|Sharia influences family laws.}}
{{legend|#179C86|Sharia plays no role in the judicial system.}}
{{legend|#FF9950|Regional variations of sharia law apply.}}
]]

=== Muslim-majority countries ===
The legal systems of most Muslim-majority countries can be classified as either secular or mixed. Sharia plays no role in secular legal systems. In mixed legal systems, Sharia rules are allowed to influence some national laws, which are codified and may be based on European or Indian models, and the central legislative role is played by politicians and modern jurists rather than the [[ulema]] (traditional Islamic scholars).

Saudi Arabia and some other Persian Gulf states possess what may be called classical Sharia systems, where national law is largely uncodified and formally equated with Sharia, with ulema playing a decisive role in its interpretation. Iran has adopted some features of classical Sharia systems, while also maintaining characteristics of mixed systems, like codified laws and a parliament.{{sfn|Otto|2008|pp=8–9}}

==== Constitutional law ====
Constitutions of many Muslim-majority countries refer to Sharia as a source or the main source of law, though these references are not in themselves indicative of how much the legal system is influenced by Sharia, and whether the influence has a traditionalist or modernist character.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}}{{sfn|Calder|2009}} The same constitutions usually also refer to universal principles such as democracy and human rights, leaving it up to legislators and the judiciary to work out how these norms are to be reconciled in practice.{{sfn|Otto|2008|pp=18–19}} Conversely, some countries (e.g., Algeria), whose constitution does not mention Sharia, possess Sharia-based family laws.{{sfn|Calder|2009}} Nisrine Abiad identifies Bahrain, Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia as states with "strong constitutional consequences of Sharia "on the organization and functioning of power".{{sfn|Abiad|2008|pp=38–42}}

==== Family law ====
Except for secular systems, Muslim-majority countries possess Sharia-based laws dealing with family matters (marriage, inheritance, etc.). These laws generally reflect influence of various modern-era reforms and tend to be characterized by ambiguity, with traditional and modernist interpretations often manifesting themselves in the same country, both in legislation and court decisions.{{sfn|Otto|2008|p=19}} In some countries (e.g., parts of Nigeria), people can choose whether to pursue a case in a Sharia or secular court.{{sfn|Otto|2008|p=19}}<ref>{{cite news|title=Greece Scraps Compulsory Shariah for Muslim Minority|author=Niki Kitsantonis|newspaper=The New York Times|date=10 January 2018|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/world/europe/greece-shariah-law.html|access-date=16 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190416212547/https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/10/world/europe/greece-shariah-law.html|archive-date=16 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

==== Criminal law ====
{{Multiple image
| total_width       = 300
| image1            = Adam Ismaeel 1986.jpg
| image2            = Ibrahim Osman 1986.jpg
| footer            = Cross amputation survivors, Adam Ismaeel (left) and Ibrahim Osman (right), of the [[September 1983 Laws]] in Sudan, pictured in 1986; According to the understanding, these people must have declared war against Allah and the Prophet.}}
Countries in the Muslim world generally have criminal codes influenced by [[Civil law (legal system)|civil law]] or [[common law]], and in some cases a combination of Western legal traditions. Saudi Arabia has never adopted a criminal code and Saudi judges still follow traditional Hanbali jurisprudence. In the course of Islamization campaigns, several countries (Libya, Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, Mauritania, and Yemen) inserted Islamic criminal laws into their penal codes, which were otherwise based on Western models. In some countries only ''hudud'' penalties were added, while others also enacted provisions for ''[[qisas]]'' (law of retaliation) and ''[[Diya (Islam)|diya]]'' (monetary compensation). Iran subsequently issued a new "Islamic Penal Code". The criminal codes of [[Afghanistan]] and [[United Arab Emirates]] contain a general provision that certain crimes are to be punished according to Islamic law, without specifying the penalties. Some Nigerian states have also enacted Islamic criminal laws. [[Islamic criminal law in Aceh|Laws in the Indonesian province of Aceh]] provide for application of discretionary (''[[ta'zir]]'') punishments for violation of Islamic norms, but explicitly exclude ''hudud'' and ''qisas''.{{sfn|Tellenbach|2015|pp=249–50}} [[Brunei]] has been implementing a "Sharia Penal Code", which includes provisions for stoning and amputation, in stages since 2014.<ref>{{cite news|newspaper=New York Times|author=Austin Ramzy|title=Brunei to Punish Adultery and Gay Sex With Death by Stoning|date=28 March 2019|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/28/world/asia/brunei-adultery-gay-stoning.html|access-date=28 March 2019|archive-date=25 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210225124704/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/28/world/asia/brunei-stoning-death.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Brunei Shariah law applies death sentence for homosexuality|newspaper=Deutsche Welle|date=27 March 2019|url=https://www.dw.com/en/brunei-shariah-law-applies-death-sentence-for-homosexuality/a-48076114|access-date=27 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190331093514/https://www.dw.com/en/brunei-shariah-law-applies-death-sentence-for-homosexuality/a-48076114|archive-date=31 March 2019|url-status=live}}</ref> The countries where ''hudud'' penalties are legal do not use stoning and amputation routinely, and generally apply other punishments instead.{{sfn|Vikør|2014}}{{sfn|Otto|2008|p=20}}{{sfn|Brown|2017}}

==== Property law ====
Sharia recognizes the concept of ''haqq''.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Birnhack|first1=Michael|last2=Khoury |first2=Amir|editor1-first=Rochelle|editor1-last=Dreyfuss|editor2-first=Justine|editor2-last=Pila |date=10 May 2017|chapter=The Emergence and Development of Intellectual Property Law in the Middle East |title=The Oxford Handbook of Intellectual Property Law|series=Oxford Handbooks|publisher=Oxford Academic |edition=online |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198758457.013.19}}</ref> ''Haqq'' refers to personal rights of the individual and the right to generate and accumulate wealth. The various ways in which property can be acquired under Sharia are purchase, inheritance, bequest, physical or mental effort, ''diya'' and donations.<ref name="autogenerated139">{{Cite journal|date=March 1951|title=Outlines of Muhammadan Law. By Asaf A. A. Fyzee. [India: Oxford University Press. 1949. xvi and 443 pp. 25s.]|journal=The Cambridge Law Journal |volume=11|issue=1|pages=139–140|doi=10.1017/s0008197300015518|issn=0008-1973}}</ref> Certain concepts relating to property under Sharia are ''Mulk'', ''Waqf'', ''Mawat'' and ''Motasarruf''.<ref name="autogenerated139" />

=== Court procedures ===
{{Original research|section|Most of this section consisted of ahistorical generalizations made by WP editors from snippets describing various pre-modern and modern legal systems without distinguishing between them. The most serious misrepresentations have been corrected, but this material needs to be verified more carefully.|date=March 2019}}
{{anchor|Courts}}
[[File:Melaka State Syariah Court.jpg|thumb|Shariah court in [[Malacca]], Malaysia]]

Sharia courts traditionally do not rely on lawyers; [[plaintiffs]] and [[defendants]] represent themselves. In Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which have preserved traditional procedure in Sharia courts, trials are conducted solely by the judge, and there is no jury system. There is no pre-trial [[Discovery (law)|discovery]] process, and no [[cross-examination]] of witnesses. Unlike common law, judges' verdicts do not set binding [[precedents]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/pspa/qatar.html |title=Qatar: The Duality of the Legal System |access-date=28 April 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100708060546/http://ddc.aub.edu.lb/projects/pspa/qatar.html |archive-date=8 July 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref> under the principle of ''[[stare decisis]]'',<ref>[https://caselaw.findlaw.com/data2/delawarestatecases/493-2003.pdf ''Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp. v. Mobil Yanbu Petrochemical Co.'', Supreme Court of Delaware, January 14, 2005 p. 52]. "The Saudi law system differs in critically important respects from the system of legal thought employed by the common law countries, including the United States. Perhaps most significant is that Islamic law does not embrace the common law system of binding precedent and ''stare decisis''. In Saudi Arabia, judicial decisions are not in themselves a source of law, and with minor exceptions, court decisions in Saudi Arabia are not published or even open to public inspection."</ref> and unlike civil law, Sharia is left to the interpretation in each case and has no formally [[Codification (law)|codified]] universal statutes.<ref>Tetley (1999), Mixed Jurisdictions: Common Law v. Civil Law (Codified and Uncodified), La. Law Review, 60, 677</ref>

The [[rules of evidence]] in Sharia courts traditionally prioritize oral testimony, and witnesses must be Muslim.<ref name="av1">Antoinette Vlieger (2012), Domestic Workers in Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, {{ISBN|978-1610271288}}, Chapter 4{{page needed|date=April 2016}}</ref><ref>Tahir Wasti (2009), The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan, Brill Academic, {{ISBN|978-9004172258}}, pp. 126–27</ref><ref>Etannibi E. O. Alemika (2005), "Human Rights and Shariah Penal Code in Northern Nigeria", ''UN Human Rights Monitor'', pp. 110–27</ref><ref name="unicef2011" /><ref name="mfdl1" /> In criminal cases, women witnesses are unacceptable in stricter, traditional interpretations of Sharia, such as those found in [[Hanbali]] jurisprudence, which forms the basis of law in Saudi Arabia.<ref name="av1" />

====Evidences / testimonies====
'''In Criminal cases''': A confession, an oath, or the oral testimony of Muslim witnesses are the main evidence admissible in traditional sharia courts for hudud crimes, i.e., the religious crimes of adultery, fornication, rape, accusing someone of illicit sex but failing to prove it, [[Apostasy in Islam|apostasy]], drinking intoxicants and theft.<ref>Mohamed S. El-Awa (1993), Punishment In Islamic Law, American Trust Publications, {{ISBN|978-0892591428}}, pp. 1–68{{nonspecific|date=April 2016}}</ref><ref>Philip Reichel and Jay Albanese (2013), Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice, Sage publications, {{ISBN|978-1452240350}}, pp. 36–37</ref>{{sfn|Otto|2008|p=663}}{{sfn|Otto|2008|p=31}}

According to classical jurisprudence, testimony must be from at least two free Muslim male witnesses, or one Muslim male and two Muslim females, who are not related parties and who are of sound mind and reliable character. Testimony to establish the crime of adultery, fornication or rape must be from four Muslim male witnesses, with some [[fiqh]]s allowing substitution of up to three male with six female witnesses; however, at least one must be a Muslim male.<ref>Ajijola, Alhaji A.D. (1989). ''Introduction to Islamic Law''. Karachi: International Islamic Publishers. p. 133.</ref>

[[Forensic identification|Forensic evidence]] (''i.e.'', fingerprints, ballistics, blood samples, DNA etc.) and other [[circumstantial evidence]] may likewise rejected in [[hudud]] cases in favor of eyewitnesses in some modern interpretations. In the case of regulations that were part of local Malaysian legislation that did not go into effect, this could cause severe difficulties for women plaintiffs in rape cases.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kamali |first1=Mohammad Hashim |author-link=Mohammad Hashim Kamali |year=1998 |title=Punishment in Islamic Law: A Critique of the Hudud Bill of Kelantan, Malaysia |jstor=3382008 |journal=[[Arab Law Quarterly]] |volume=13 |issue=3 |pages=203–34 |doi=10.1163/026805598125826102}}{{request quotation|date=April 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mohd Noor |first1=Azman |last2=Ibrahim |first2=Ahmad Basri |year=2008 |title=The rights of a rape victim in Islamic Law |journal=IIUM Law Journal |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=65–83 |url=http://irep.iium.edu.my/id/eprint/5699 |access-date=19 July 2016 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213728/http://irep.iium.edu.my/5699/ |url-status=live }}</ref> In Pakistan, DNA evidence is rejected in paternity cases on the basis of legislation that favors the presumption of children's legitimacy, while in sexual assault cases DNA evidence is regarded as equivalent to expert opinion and evaluated on a case-by-case basis.<ref>{{cite journal|title=DNA Evidence in Pakistani Courts: An Analysis|author=Shahbaz Ahmad Cheema|journal=Lums Law Journal|volume=3|url=https://sahsol.lums.edu.pk/law-journal/dna-evidence-pakistani-courts-analysis|date=30 January 2017|access-date=25 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190325131327/https://sahsol.lums.edu.pk/law-journal/dna-evidence-pakistani-courts-analysis|archive-date=25 March 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

'''In civil cases''';{{qref|2|282|b=y}} recommends written financial contracts with reliable witnesses, although there is dispute about equality of female testimony.<ref name="mfdl1">{{cite journal |last1=Fadel |first1=Mohammad |title=Two Women, One Man: Knowledge, Power, and Gender in Medieval Sunni Legal Thought |journal=International Journal of Middle East Studies |volume=29 |issue=2 |year=2009 |pages=185–204 |ssrn=1113891 |jstor=164016 |doi=10.1017/S0020743800064461|s2cid=143083939 }}</ref>

Marriage is solemnized as a written financial contract, in the presence of two Muslim male witnesses, and it includes a brideprice ([[Mahr]]) payable from a Muslim man to a Muslim woman. The brideprice is considered by a Sharia court as a form of debt. Written contracts were traditionally considered paramount in Sharia courts in the matters of dispute that are debt-related, which includes marriage contracts.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Paul Powers |date=2005 |title=Intent in Islamic Law: Motive and Meaning in Medieval Sunnī Fiqh |publisher=Brill Academic |isbn=978-9004145924 |pages=97–110, 125–41}}</ref> Written contracts in debt-related cases, when notarized by a judge, is deemed more reliable.<ref name="remes1" />

In commercial and civil contracts, such as those relating to exchange of merchandise, agreement to supply or purchase goods or property, and others, oral contracts and the testimony of Muslim witnesses historically triumphed over written contracts. Islamic jurists traditionally held that written commercial contracts may be forged.<ref name="remes1">Reem Meshal (2014), ''Sharia and the Making of the Modern Egyptian'', [[Oxford University Press]], {{ISBN|978-9774166174}}, pp. 96–101 and Chapter 4</ref><ref name="timku1">Timur Kuran (2012), The Long Divergence: How Islamic Law Held Back the Middle East, Princeton University Press, {{ISBN|978-0691156415}}, pp. 246–49 and Chapter 12</ref> [[Timur Kuran]] states that the treatment of written evidence in religious courts in Islamic regions created an incentive for opaque transactions, and the avoidance of written contracts in economic relations. This led to a continuation of a "largely oral contracting culture" in Muslim-majority nations and communities.<ref name="timku1" /><ref>[http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/private/ierc/conference_registration/papers/Kuran.pdf "Explaining the Economic Trajectories of Civilizations&nbsp;– Musings on the Systemic Approach"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141020235639/http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/private/ierc/conference_registration/papers/Kuran.pdf |date=20 October 2014 }} pp. 7, 10.</ref>

In lieu of written evidence, oaths are traditionally accorded much greater weight; rather than being used simply to guarantee the truth of ensuing testimony, they are themselves used as evidence. Plaintiffs lacking other evidence to support their claims may demand that defendants take an oath swearing their innocence, refusal thereof can result in a verdict for the plaintiff.<ref>Lippman, Matthew Ross; McConville, Seán; Yerushalmi, Mordechai (1988). ''Islamic Criminal Law and Procedure&nbsp;– An Introduction''. New York City: [[Praeger Publishers]]. p. 71. {{ISBN|978-0275930097}}.</ref> Taking an oath for Muslims can be a grave act; one study of courts in Morocco found that lying litigants would often "maintain their testimony right up to the moment of oath-taking and then to stop, refuse the oath, and surrender the case."<ref name="frank">Frank, Michael J. (April 2006). "Trying Times&nbsp;– The Prosecution of Terrorists in the Central Criminal Court of Iraq". ''[[Florida Journal of International Law]]''.{{page needed|date=April 2016}}</ref> Accordingly, defendants are not routinely required to swear before testifying, which would risk casually profaning the Quran should the defendant commit perjury.<ref name="frank" />

==== Diya ====
{{main|Diya (Islam)}}

In classical jurisprudence monetary compensation for bodily harm (''[[Diya (Islam)|diya]]'' or blood money) is assessed differently for different classes of victims. For example, for Muslim women the amount was half that assessed for a Muslim man.<ref>{{cite journal |first1=Arsani |last1=William |title=An Unjust Doctrine of Civil Arbitration: Sharia Courts in Canada and England |journal=Stanford Journal of International Relations |date=Spring 2010 |volume=11 |issue=2 |pages=40–47 |url=https://web.stanford.edu/group/sjir/pdf/Sharia_11.2.pdf |access-date=18 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160818210814/https://web.stanford.edu/group/sjir/pdf/Sharia_11.2.pdf |archive-date=18 August 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>M Kar (2005), Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures: Family, Law and Politics (Ed: Suad Joseph, Afsāna Naǧmābādī), Brill, {{ISBN|978-9004128187}}, pp. 406–07</ref> ''Diya'' for the death of a free Muslim man is twice as high as for Jewish and Christian victims according to the Maliki and Hanbali madhhabs and three times as high according to Shafi'i rules.<ref name="ame1" /> Several legal schools assessed ''diya'' for [[Magians]] (''[[majus]]'') at one-fifteenth the value of a free Muslim male.<ref name="ame1">Anver M. Emon (2012), ''Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire of Law'', Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0199661633}}, pp. 234–35</ref>

Modern countries which incorporate classical ''diya'' rules into their legal system treat them in different ways. The Pakistan Penal Code modernized the Hanafi doctrine by eliminating distinctions between Muslims and non-Muslims.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan |author=Tahir Wasti |publisher=Brill |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA49 |page=49 |year=2009 |isbn=978-9004172258 |access-date=17 June 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171011033255/https://books.google.com/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA49 |archive-date=11 October 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref> In Iran, ''diya'' for non-Muslim victims professing one of the faiths protected under the constitution (Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians) was made equal to ''diya'' for Muslims in 2004,<ref>{{cite book |title=The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law |editor=Markus D. Dubber |editor2=Tatjana Hörnle |author=Silvia Tellenbach |chapter=Islamic Criminal Law |page=261 |year=2014 |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199673599.001.0001|isbn=978-0199673599 }}</ref> though according to a 2006 US State Department report, the penal code still discriminates against other religious minorities and women.<ref>{{cite web |author=U.S. State Department |url=https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71421.htm |title=International Religious Freedom Report 2006, U.S. State Department |date=17 October 2008 |access-date=22 May 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190525202703/https://2001-2009.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2006/71421.htm |archive-date=25 May 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref> According to Human Rights Watch and the US State Department, in Saudi Arabia Jewish or Christian male plaintiffs are entitled to half the amount a Muslim male would receive, while for all other non-Muslim males the proportion is one-sixteenth.<ref>State Department of the U.S. Government (2012), [https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/208622.pdf Saudi Arabia 2012, International Religious Freedom Report, p. 4] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170328183313/https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/208622.pdf |date=28 March 2017 }}</ref><ref>Human Rights Watch (2004), [https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/saudi0704/4.htm#_ftn54 Migrant Communities in Saudi Arabia] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171010065345/https://www.hrw.org/reports/2004/saudi0704/4.htm#_ftn54 |date=10 October 2017 }}</ref><ref>[https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2011/nea/192905.htm Saudi Arabia] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213724/https://2009-2017.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2011/nea/192905.htm |date=27 December 2020 }} Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, US State Department, 2011 Report on International Religious Freedom Report (2011)</ref>

=== Role of fatwas ===
{{Main|Fatwa}}
[[File:Türkischer Mufti.jpg|thumb|upright|Turkish mufti (17th-century Spanish drawing)]]

The spread of codified state laws and Western-style legal education in the modern Muslim world has displaced traditional muftis from their historical role of clarifying and elaborating the laws applied in courts.{{sfn|Hendrickson|2013}}{{sfn|Masud|Kéchichian|2009}} Instead, fatwas have increasingly served to advise the general public on other aspects of Sharia, particularly questions regarding religious rituals and everyday life.{{sfn|Hendrickson|2013}}{{sfn|Messick|2017}} Modern fatwas deal with topics as diverse as insurance, sex-change operations, moon exploration and beer drinking.{{sfn|Messick|2017}} Most Muslim-majority states have established national organizations devoted to issuing fatwas, and these organizations to a considerable extent replaced independent muftis as religious guides for the general population.{{sfn|Messick|Kéchichian|2009}} State-employed muftis generally promote a vision of Islam that is compatible with state law of their country.{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}}

Modern public and political fatwas have addressed and sometimes sparked controversies in the Muslim world and beyond.{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}} [[Ayatollah Khomeini]]'s [[Rushdie Affair|proclamation]] condemning [[Salman Rushdie]] to death for his novel ''[[The Satanic Verses]]'' is credited with bringing the notion of fatwa to world's attention,{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}}{{sfn|Messick|2017}} although some scholars have argued that it did not qualify as one.{{refn|group=note|Khomeini himself did not call this proclamation a fatwa, and in Islamic legal theory only a court can decide whether an accused is guilty. However, after the proclamation was presented as a fatwa in Western press, this characterization was widely accepted by both its critics and its supporters.{{sfn|Hendrickson|2013}}{{sfn|Vikør|2005|p=142}}}} Together with later militant fatwas, it has contributed to the popular misconception of the fatwa as a religious death warrant.{{sfn|Berger|2014}}

Modern fatwas have been marked by an increased reliance on the process of ''[[ijtihad]]'', i.e. deriving legal rulings based on an independent analysis rather than conformity with the opinions of earlier legal authorities (''[[taqlid]]''),{{sfn|Berger|2014}} and some of them are issued by individuals who do not possess the qualifications traditionally required of a mufti.{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}} The most notorious examples are the fatwas of [[Islamic extremism|militant extremists]].{{sfn|Berger|2014}} When [[Osama bin Laden]] and his associates issued a fatwa in 1998 proclaiming "jihad against Jews and Crusaders", many Islamic jurists, in addition to denouncing its content, stressed that bin Laden was not qualified to either issue a fatwa or proclaim a jihad.{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}} New forms of ijtihad have also given rise to fatwas that support such notions as gender equality and banking interest, which are at variance with classical jurisprudence.{{sfn|Berger|2014}}

In the internet age, a large number of websites provide fatwas in response to queries from around the world, in addition to radio shows and satellite television programs offering call-in fatwas.{{sfn|Dallal|Hendrickson|2009}} Erroneous and sometimes bizarre fatwas issued by unqualified or eccentric individuals in recent times have sometimes given rise to complaints about a "chaos" in the modern practice of issuing fatwas.{{sfn|Messick|2017}} There exists no international Islamic authority to settle differences in interpretation of Islamic law. An [[International Islamic Fiqh Academy, Jeddah|International Islamic Fiqh Academy]] was created by the [[Organisation of Islamic Cooperation]], but its legal opinions are not binding.{{sfn|Masud|Kéchichian|2009}} The vast amount of fatwas produced in the modern world attests to the importance of Islamic authenticity to many Muslims. However, there is little research available to indicate to what extent Muslims acknowledge the authority of different muftis or heed their rulings in real life.{{sfn|Berger|2014}}

=== Role of ''hisba'' ===
{{Main|Hisbah}}
{{Further|Islamic religious police}}

The classical doctrine of ''[[Hisbah|hisba]]'', associated with the Quranic injunction of ''[[enjoining good and forbidding wrong]]'', refers to the duty of Muslims to promote moral rectitude and intervene when another Muslim is acting wrongly.{{sfn|Thielmann|2017}}{{sfn|Mack|2018}} Historically, its legal implementation was entrusted to a public official called ''[[muhtasib]]'' (market inspector), who was charged with preventing fraud, disturbance of public order and infractions against public morality. This office disappeared in the modern era everywhere in the Muslim world, but it was revived in Arabia by the first Saudi state, and later instituted as a [[Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Saudi Arabia)|government committee]] responsible for supervising markets and public order. It has been aided by volunteers enforcing attendance of daily prayers, gender segregation in public places, and a conservative notion of [[hijab]].{{sfn|Thielmann|2017}} Committee officers were authorized to detain violators before a 2016 reform.{{sfn|Chan|2016}} With the rising international influence of [[Wahhabism]], the conception of ''hisba'' as an individual obligation to police religious observance has become more widespread, which led to the appearance of activists around the world who urge fellow Muslims to observe Islamic rituals, dress code, and other aspects of Sharia.{{sfn|Thielmann|2017}}

[[File:Taliban beating woman in public RAWA.jpg|right|thumb|Taliban [[Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Saudi Arabia)|religious police]] beating a woman in [[Kabul]] on 26 August 2001, as reported by [[Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan|RAWA]],<ref>{{cite web |title=Movies |url=http://www.rawa.us/movies/beating.mpg |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090325014821/http://www.rawa.us/movies/beating.mpg |archive-date=25 March 2009 |publisher=Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) |format=MPG}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=Nitya Ramakrishnan |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=iRdBDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT437 |title=In Custody: Law, Impunity and Prisoner Abuse in South Asia |publisher=Sage Publishing India |year=2013 |isbn=978-8132117513 |page=437 |access-date=16 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213726/https://books.google.com/books?id=iRdBDwAAQBAJ&pg=PT437 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> for opening her [[burqa]] (face)]]

In Iran, ''hisba'' was enshrined in the constitution after the [[Iranian Revolution|1979 Revolution]] as a "universal and reciprocal duty", incumbent upon both the government and the people. Its implementation has been carried out by official committees as well as volunteer forces (''[[basij]]'').{{sfn|Thielmann|2017}}<ref name="rferl">{{cite web |date=15 January 2009 |title=Iran's Basij Force&nbsp;– The Mainstay Of Domestic Security |url=http://www.rferl.org/content/Irans_Basij_Force_Mainstay_Of_Domestic_Security/1357081.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120110190716/http://www.rferl.org/content/Irans_Basij_Force_Mainstay_Of_Domestic_Security/1357081.html |archive-date=10 January 2012 |access-date=24 May 2014 |work=RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty}}</ref> Elsewhere, policing of various interpretations of Sharia-based public morality has been carried out by the [[Kano State Hisbah Corps]] in the Nigerian state of [[Kano State|Kano]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Olaniyi |first1=Rasheed Oyewole |year=2011 |title=Hisbah and Sharia Law Enforcement in Metropolitan Kano |journal=Africa Today |volume=57 |issue=4 |pages=71–96 |doi=10.2979/africatoday.57.4.71 |s2cid=154801688}}</ref> by ''Wilayatul Hisbah'' in the Aceh province of [[Indonesia]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Uddin |first1=Asma |year=2010 |title=Religious Freedom Implications of Sharia Implementation in Aceh, Indonesia |url=http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustlj/vol7/iss3/8/ |url-status=live |journal=University of St. Thomas Law Journal |volume=7 |issue=3 |pages=603–48 |ssrn=1885776 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160528220701/http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustlj/vol7/iss3/8/ |archive-date=28 May 2016 |access-date=10 June 2016}}</ref> by the [[Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Gaza Strip)|Committee for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice]] in the Gaza Strip, and by the [[Taliban]] during their 1996–2001 and 2021–present rule of Afghanistan.{{sfn|Thielmann|2017}} Religious police organizations tend to have support from conservative currents of public opinion, but their activities are often disliked by other segments of the population, especially liberals, urban women, and younger people.<ref>{{cite web |date=22 April 2016 |title=Who are Islamic 'morality police'? |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36101150 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190413170252/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36101150 |archive-date=13 April 2019 |access-date=18 April 2019 |website=[[BBC News Online]]}}</ref>

In Egypt, a law based on the doctrine of hisba had for a time allowed a Muslim to sue another Muslim over beliefs that may harm society, though because of abuses it has been amended so that only the state prosecutor may bring suit based on private requests.<ref name="Gallagher">Nancy Gallagher (2005), Apostasy, Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures: Family, Law and Politics, Editors: Suad Joseph and Afsāna Naǧmābād, {{ISBN|978-9004128187}}, p. 9</ref> Before the amendment was passed, a hisba suit brought by a group of Islamists against the liberal theologian [[Nasr Abu Zayd]] on charges of [[Apostasy in Islam|apostasy]] led to the annulment of his marriage.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Berger |first1=Maurits |year=2003 |title=Apostasy and Public Policy in Contemporary Egypt: An Evaluation of Recent Cases from Egypt's Highest Courts |url=https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/13673/MS%20Berger%20-%20Apostasy%20and%20public%20policy%20in%20contemporary%20Egypt.pdf?sequence=1 |url-status=live |journal=Human Rights Quarterly |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=720–40 |doi=10.1353/hrq.2003.0026 |jstor=20069684 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190418033611/https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/13673/MS%20Berger%20-%20Apostasy%20and%20public%20policy%20in%20contemporary%20Egypt.pdf?sequence=1 |archive-date=18 April 2019 |access-date=11 April 2019 |hdl-access=free |hdl=1887/13673 |s2cid=144601396}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Olsson |first1=Susanne |year=2008 |title=Apostasy in Egypt: Contemporary Cases of Ḥisbah |journal=The Muslim World |volume=98 |issue=1 |pages=95–115 |doi=10.1111/j.1478-1913.2008.00212.x}}</ref> The law was also invoked in an unsuccessful blasphemy suit against the feminist author [[Nawal El Saadawi]].<ref name="Gallagher" /> Hisba has also been invoked in several Muslim-majority countries as rationale for blocking pornographic content on the internet and for other forms of faith-based censorship.<ref>Helmi Noman (2013), "In the name of God – Faith based internet censorship in majority Muslim countries", in ''Routledge Handbook of Media Law'' (Editors: Monroe E. Price, et al.), Routledge, {{ISBN|978-0415683166}}, Chapter 14, p. 257</ref>

=== Muslim-minority countries ===
Sharia also plays a role beyond religious rituals and personal ethics in some countries with Muslim minorities. For example, in Israel Sharia-based family laws are administered for the Muslim population by the [[Ministry of Justice (Israel)|Ministry of Justice]] through the Sharia Courts.<ref>{{cite web|website=[[Israel Ministry of Justice]]|title=The Sharia Courts|url=https://www.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ShariaCourts/Pages/default.aspx|access-date=19 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190325005530/https://www.justice.gov.il/En/Units/ShariaCourts/Pages/default.aspx|archive-date=25 March 2019|url-status=live}}</ref> In India, the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act provides for the use of Islamic law for Muslims in several areas, mainly related to family law.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.law.emory.edu/ifl/legal/india.htm |title=India |publisher=Law.emory.edu |access-date=18 February 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130116220209/http://www.law.emory.edu/ifl/legal/india.htm |archive-date=16 January 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref> In England, the [[Muslim Arbitration Tribunal]] makes use of Sharia family law to settle disputes, though this limited adoption of Sharia is controversial.<ref>Taher, Abul (14 September 2008). Revealed: UK's first official sharia courts. ''The Sunday Times''</ref><ref>[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9975937/Inside-Britains-Sharia-courts.html Inside Britain's Sharia courts] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180518200507/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/9975937/Inside-Britains-Sharia-courts.html |date=18 May 2018 }} Jane Corbin, ''The Telegraph'' (7 April 2013)</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bowen |first1=John R. |year=2010 |url=http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustlj/vol7/iss3/3/ |title=How could English courts recognize Shariah? |journal=University of St. Thomas Law Journal |volume=7 |issue=3 |pages=411–35 |access-date=19 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160821120614/http://ir.stthomas.edu/ustlj/vol7/iss3/3/ |archive-date=21 August 2016 |url-status=live }}</ref>