Editing Sharia (section)

== Contemporary debates and controversies ==
=== Compatibility with democracy ===
It has been argued that the extent to which Sharia is compatible with democracy depends on how it is culturally interpreted,<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last=Berger|first=Lars|date=17 February 2019|title=Sharīʻa, Islamism and Arab support for democracy|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2018.1527316|journal=Democratization|volume=26|issue=2|pages=309–26|doi=10.1080/13510347.2018.1527316|s2cid=150075053|issn=1351-0347|access-date=4 April 2020|archive-date=27 December 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213741/https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13510347.2018.1527316|url-status=live}}</ref> with a cultural position that Sharia represents the human attempt to interpret God's message associated with a greater preference for democracy than an Islamist interpretation that Sharia law is the literal word of God.<ref name=":1" />

==== General Muslim views ====
Scholars [[John Esposito]] and [[Natana J. DeLong-Bas]] distinguish four attitudes toward Sharia and democracy prominent among contemporary Muslims:{{sfn|Esposito|DeLong-Bas|2018|pp=142–43}}
* Advocacy of democratic ideas, often accompanied by a belief that they are compatible with Islam, which can play a public role within a democratic system, as exemplified by many protestors who took part in the [[Arab Spring]] uprisings;
* Support for democratic procedures such as elections, combined with religious or moral objections toward some aspects of Western democracy seen as incompatible with Sharia, as exemplified by Islamic scholars like [[Yusuf al-Qaradawi]];
* Rejection of democracy as a Western import and advocacy of traditional Islamic institutions, such as ''[[shura]]'' (consultation) and ''[[ijma]]'' (consensus), as exemplified by supporters of absolute monarchy and radical Islamist movements;
* Belief that democracy requires restricting religion to private life: a view held by a minority in the Muslim world.

According to Polls conducted by [[Gallup (company)|Gallup]] and [[Pew Research Center]] in [[Muslim-majority]] countries, most Muslims see no contradiction between democratic values and religious principles, desiring neither theocracy nor a secular democracy but rather a political model where democratic institutions and values can coexist with the values and principles of Sharia.{{sfn|Esposito|DeLong-Bas|2018|p=145}}<ref>{{cite web|website=Pew Research Center|title=Most Muslims Want Democracy, Personal Freedoms, and Islam in Political Life|date=10 July 2012|url=https://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/|access-date=17 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190417133154/https://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/|archive-date=17 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|website=Gallup|title=Majorities See Religion and Democracy as Compatible|date=3 October 2017|author1=Magali Rheault|author2=Dalia Mogahed|url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/28762/majorities-muslims-americans-see-religion-law-compatible.aspx|access-date=17 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190417133158/https://news.gallup.com/poll/28762/majorities-muslims-americans-see-religion-law-compatible.aspx|archive-date=17 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref>

==== Islamic political theories ====
{{Main|Political aspects of Islam|Islam and democracy|Shura|Ijma}}
[[File:Grand Ayatollahs Qom فتوکلاژ، آیت الله های ایران-قم 02.jpg|thumb|220px|upright|[[Ayatollah|Grand Ayatollah]]s of [[Qom]], Iran; Religious leaders who have the authority to interpret Sharia sources in [[Shiism|Shia Islam]]<ref>Sociology of religions: perspectives of Ali Shariati (2008) Mir Mohammed Ibrahim</ref> used assertive names and titles such as [[Ruhollah Khomeini|Ruhollah]], [[Ayatollah]], [[Hujjat al-Islam]], which directly connect their identities to Allah or Islam, and gained [[walayah|tutelage over people and the administration]].<ref name="Newman in Meri 2006 734">{{harvnb| Newman|2006|p=734}}</ref>]]
Muslih and Browers identify three major perspectives on democracy among prominent Muslim thinkers who have sought to develop modern, distinctly Islamic theories of socio-political organization conforming to Islamic values and law:{{sfn|Muslih|Browers|2009}}
* The rejectionist Islamic view, elaborated by [[Sayyid Qutb]] and [[Abul A'la Maududi]], condemns imitation of foreign ideas, distinguishing Western democracy and the Islamic doctrine of ''shura'' (consultation between ruler and ruled). This perspective, which stresses the comprehensive implementation of Sharia, was widespread in the 1970s and 1980s among various movements seeking to establish an Islamic state, but its popularity has diminished in recent years.
* The moderate Islamic view stresses the concepts of ''[[maslaha]]'' (public interest), ''[[Adl|ʿadl]]'' (justice), and ''shura''. Islamic leaders are considered to uphold justice if they promote public interest, as defined through ''shura''. In this view, ''shura'' provides the basis for representative government institutions that are similar to Western democracy but reflect Islamic rather than Western values.{{Citation needed|date=January 2025}} [[Hasan al-Turabi]], [[Rashid al-Ghannushi]], and [[Yusuf al-Qaradawi]] have advocated different forms of this view.
* The liberal Islamic view is influenced by [[Muhammad Abduh]]'s emphasis on the role of reason in understanding religion. It stresses democratic principles based on pluralism and freedom of thought. Authors like [[Fahmi Huwaidi]] and [[Tariq al-Bishri]] have constructed Islamic justifications for full citizenship of non-Muslims in an Islamic state by drawing on early Islamic texts. Others, like [[Mohammed Arkoun]] and [[Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd]], have justified pluralism and freedom through non-literalist approaches to textual interpretation. [[Abdolkarim Soroush]] has argued for a "religious democracy" based on religious thought that is democratic, tolerant, and just. Islamic liberals argue for the necessity of constant reexamination of religious understanding, which can only be done in a democratic context.

==== European Court of Human Rights ====
In 1998, the [[Constitutional Court of Turkey]] banned and dissolved Turkey's [[Welfare Party|Refah Party]] over its announced intention to introduce Sharia-based laws, ruling that it would change Turkey's secular order and undermine democracy.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kevin Boyle |year=2004 |title=Human Rights, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case |url=http://projects.essex.ac.uk/EHRR/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Essex Human Rights Review |volume=1 |page=2 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421043912/http://projects.essex.ac.uk/ehrr/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |archive-date=21 April 2018 |access-date=16 April 2019 |number=1}}</ref> On appeal by Refah the [[European Court of Human Rights]] determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy".<ref>{{cite web |date=13 February 2003 |title=Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey |url=http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol6iss1/special_5.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141129160352/http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol6iss1/special_5.htm |archive-date=29 November 2014 |access-date=20 November 2014 |publisher=The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law}}</ref><ref>[http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/29AC6DBD-C3F8-411C-9B97-B42BE466EE7A/0/2004__Wildhaber_Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf Hearing of the European Court of Human Rights] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060528154417/http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/29AC6DBD-C3F8-411C-9B97-B42BE466EE7A/0/2004__Wildhaber_Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf|date=28 May 2006}}, 22 January 2004 (PDF)</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=ECHR press release Refah Partisi (2001) |url=http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100124050055/http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm |archive-date=24 January 2010 |access-date=4 April 2012 |publisher=Echr.coe.int}}</ref> Refah's Sharia-based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the [[European Convention on Human Rights|European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms]]. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy".<ref>Christian Moe (2012), Refah Revisited: Strasbourg's Construction of Islam, in Islam, Europe and emerging legal issues (editors: W. Cole Durham Jr. et al.), {{ISBN|978-1409434443}}, pp. 235–71</ref> In an analysis, Maurits S. Berger found the ruling to be "nebulous" and surprising from a legal point of view, since the Court neglected to define what it meant by "Sharia" and would not, for example, be expected to regard Sharia rules for Islamic rituals as contravening European human rights values.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Maurits S. Berger |year=2018 |title=Understanding Sharia in the West |journal=Journal of Law, Religion and State |publisher=Brill |volume=6 |issue=2–3 |pages=236–73 |doi=10.1163/22124810-00602005 |doi-access=free|hdl=1887/62331 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Kevin Boyle also criticized the decision for not distinguishing between extremist and mainstream interpretations of Islam and implying that peaceful advocacy of Islamic doctrines ("an attitude which fails to respect [the principle of secularism]") is not protected by the European Convention provisions for freedom of religion.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kevin Boyle |year=2004 |title=Human Rights, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case |url=http://projects.essex.ac.uk/EHRR/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Essex Human Rights Review |volume=1 |page=12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421043912/http://projects.essex.ac.uk/ehrr/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |archive-date=21 April 2018 |access-date=16 April 2019 |number=1}}</ref>

=== Compatibility with human rights ===
Governments of several predominantly Muslim countries have criticized the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] (UDHR) for its perceived failure to take into account the cultural and religious context of non-[[Western world|Western]] countries. Iran declared in the UN assembly that UDHR was "a [[Secularism|secular]] understanding of the [[Judeo-Christian]] tradition", which could not be implemented by Muslims without trespassing the Islamic law.<ref>David P. Forsythe (2009), ''Encyclopedia of Human Rights'': Vol. 1, Oxford University Press, pp. 239–45</ref> Islamic scholars and Islamist political parties consider 'universal human rights' arguments as the imposition of a non-Muslim culture on Muslim people, a disrespect of customary cultural practices and Islam.<ref name=as1999>{{cite journal |first1=Amyn B |last1=Sajoo |date=Spring 1990 |title=Islam and Human Rights: Congruence or Dichotomy |journal=Temple International and Comparative Law Journal |volume=4 |issue=1 |pages=23–34 |isbn=978-0520360051 |oclc=81814299}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first1=Kecia |last1=Ali |chapter=Progressive Muslims and Islamic jurisprudence: the necessity for critical engagement with marriage and divorce law |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2MCcAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT189 |pages=163–87 |editor1-first=Omid |editor1-last=Safi |year=2003 |title=Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism |publisher=Oneworld |isbn=978-1780740454 |access-date=20 July 2016 |archive-date=12 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161212231529/https://books.google.com/books?id=2MCcAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT189 |url-status=live }}</ref> In 1990, the [[Organisation of Islamic Cooperation]], a group representing all Muslim-majority nations, met in Cairo to respond to the UDHR, then adopted the [[Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam]].<ref>{{cite journal |first1=Heiner |last1=Bielefeldt |title='Western' versus 'Islamic' Human Rights Conceptions?: A Critique of Cultural Essentialism in the Discussion on Human Rights |journal=Political Theory |volume=28 |issue=1 |year=2000 |pages=90–121 |jstor=192285 |doi=10.1177/0090591700028001005|s2cid=144825564 }}</ref><ref>Anver M. Emon, Mark Ellis, Benjamin Glahn (2012), Islamic Law and International Human Rights Law, Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0199641444}}{{page needed|date=April 2016}}</ref>

[[Ann Elizabeth Mayer]] points to notable absences from the Cairo Declaration: provisions for democratic principles, protection for religious freedom, freedom of association, and freedom of the press, as well as equality in rights and equal protection under the law. Article 24 of the Cairo declaration states that "all the rights and freedoms stipulated in this Declaration are subject to the Islamic ''shari'a''".<ref name=mayer>{{cite book |first1=Ann Elizabeth |last1=Mayer |chapter=Islamic Law and Human Rights: Conundrums and Equivocations |editor1-first=Carrie |editor1-last=Gustafson |editor2-first=Peter H. |editor2-last=Juviler |year=2016 |title=Religion and Human Rights: Competing Claims?: Competing Claims? |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1315502557}}{{page needed|date=April 2016}}</ref>

In 2009, the journal ''[[Free Inquiry]]'' summarized the criticism of the Cairo Declaration in an editorial: "We are deeply concerned with the changes to the [[Universal Declaration of Human Rights]] by a coalition of Islamic states within the [[United Nations]] that wishes to prohibit any criticism of religion and would thus protect Islam's limited view of human rights. In view of the conditions inside the Islamic Republic of Iran, Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Bangladesh, Iraq, and Afghanistan, we should expect that at the top of their human rights agenda would be to rectify the legal inequality of women, the suppression of political dissent, the curtailment of free expression, the persecution of ethnic minorities and religious dissenters—in short, protecting their citizens from egregious human rights violations. Instead, they are worrying about protecting Islam."<ref>Paul Kurtz, [[Austin Dacey]], and Tom Flynn. "Defaming Human Rights". ''[[Free Inquiry]]''. February/March 2009, Vol. 29, No. 2.</ref>

[[H. Patrick Glenn]] states that Sharia is structured around the concept of mutual obligations of a collective, and it considers individual human rights as potentially disruptive and unnecessary to its revealed code of mutual obligations. In giving priority to this religious collective rather than individual liberty, Islamic law justifies the formal inequality of individuals (women and non-Islamic people).<ref>Glenn, H. Patrick (2014), pp. 199–205</ref> Bassam Tibi states that the Sharia framework and human rights are incompatible.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tibi |first1=Bassam |title=The Return of the Sacred to Politics as a Constitutional Law The Case of the Shari'atization of Politics in Islamic Civilization |journal=Theoria |volume=55 |issue=115 |pages=91–119 |year=2008 |jstor=41802396 |doi=10.3167/th.2008.5511506}}</ref> Abdel al-Hakeem Carney, in contrast, states that Sharia is misunderstood from a failure to distinguish ''Sharia'' from ''siyasah'' (politics).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Carney |first1=ABD Al-Hakeem |title=The Desacralisation of Power in Islam |journal=Religion, State and Society |volume=31 |issue=2 |year=2003 |pages=203–19 |doi=10.1080/09637490308281|s2cid=144779047 }}</ref>

==== Blasphemy ====
{{Main|Islam and blasphemy}}
[[File:Blasphemy laws worldwide.svg|thumb|[[Blasphemy law]]s worldwide:
{{legend|#f9dc36|Subnational restrictions}}
{{legend|#ec8028|Fines and restrictions}}
{{legend|#e73e21|Prison sentences}}
{{legend|#800000|Death sentences}}]]
In classical fiqh, [[Islam and blasphemy|blasphemy]] refers to any form of cursing, questioning or annoying God, Muhammad or anything considered sacred in Islam,<ref name=khan>Siraj Khan, Blasphemy against the Prophet, in Muhammad in History, Thought, and Culture (Editors: Coeli Fitzpatrick and Adam Hani Walker), {{ISBN|978-1610691772}}, pp. 59–67</ref><ref>R Ibrahim (2013), Crucified Again, {{ISBN|978-1621570257}}, pp. 100–01</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wiederhold |first1=Lutz |title=Blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad and his companions (sabb al-rasul, sabb al-sahabah): The introduction of the topic into shafi'i legal literature and its relevance for legal practice under Mamluk rule |journal=Journal of Semitic Studies |volume=42 |issue=1 |year=1997 |pages=39–70 |doi=10.1093/jss/XLII.1.39}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Saeed |first=Abdullah |author2=Hassan Saeed |title=Freedom of Religion, Apostasy and Islam |publisher=Ashgate Publishing Company |year=2004 |location=Burlington VT |pages=38–39 |isbn=978-0754630838}}</ref> including denying one of the [[Prophets in Islam|Islamic prophets]] or scriptures, insulting an [[angels in Islam|angel]] or refusing to accept a religious commandment.<ref>Lorenz Langer (2014). ''Religious Offence and Human Rights: The Implications of Defamation of Religions'' Cambridge University Press. {{ISBN|978-1107039575}} p. 332</ref> Jurists of different schools prescribed different punishments for blasphemy against Islam by Muslims and non-Muslims, ranging from imprisonment or fines to the death penalty.<ref name=khan/><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Blasphemy: Islamic Concept |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Religion |volume=2 |pages=974–76 |publisher=Thomson Gale |location=Farmington Hills, MI |year=2005}}</ref><ref>[[Ibn Taymiyyah]] (a [[Salafi]], related to Hanbali school), ''[[As-Sarim al-Maslul 'ala Shatim ar-Rasul|al-Sārim al-Maslūl 'ala Shātim al-Rasūl]]'' (or, A ready sword against those who insult the Messenger), Published in 1297 AD in Arabic, Reprinted in 1975 and 2003 by Dar-ibn Hazm (Beirut), the book is on blasphemy/insulting Muhammad and the punishment per sharia</ref><ref>Jerusha Lamptey (2014), Never Wholly Other: A Muslima Theology of Religious Pluralism, Oxford University Press, Chapter 1 with footnotes 28, 29 p. 258</ref> In some cases, Sharia allows non-Muslims to escape death by converting and becoming a devout follower of Islam.<ref>Carl Ernst (2005), "Blasphemy: Islamic Concept", Encyclopedia of Religion (Editor: Lindsay Jones), Vol 2, Macmillan Reference, {{ISBN|0028657357}}</ref>  In the modern [[Muslim world]], the laws pertaining to blasphemy [[Blasphemy law|vary by country]], and some countries prescribe punishments consisting of fines, imprisonment, [[flogging]], [[hanging]], or [[Beheading in Islam|beheading]].<ref name=psns>P Smith (2003). "Speak No Evil: Apostasy, Blasphemy and Heresy in Malaysian Syariah Law". ''UC Davis Journal Int'l Law & Policy''. 10, pp. 357–73.
* N Swazo (2014). "The Case of Hamza Kashgari: Examining Apostasy, Heresy, and Blasphemy Under Sharia". ''The Review of Faith & International Affairs'' '''12'''(4). pp.&nbsp;16–26.</ref>

Blasphemy laws were rarely enforced in pre-modern Islamic societies, but in the modern era, some states and radical groups have used charges of blasphemy to burnish their religious credentials and gain popular support at the expense of liberal Muslim intellectuals and religious minorities.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Islam|title=Blasphemy|editor= Juan Eduardo Campo|publisher=Infobase Publishing|year=2009}}</ref>

Blasphemy, as interpreted under Sharia, is controversial.<ref>Harun Omer, [http://thesharia.com/the-invented-islam-punishment-for-blasphemy/ "The Invented Islam – 'Punishment for Blasphemy'"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222092312/http://thesharia.com/the-invented-islam-punishment-for-blasphemy/ |date=22 December 2015 }}, ''TheSharia.com'', 2015</ref> Representatives of the [[Organisation of Islamic Cooperation]] have petitioned the United Nations to condemn "defamation of religions" because "Unrestricted and disrespectful freedom of opinion creates hatred and is contrary to the spirit of peaceful dialogue".<ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea An Anti-Blasphemy Measure Laid to Rest] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150119065732/http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/263450/anti-blasphemy-measure-laid-rest-nina-shea |date=19 January 2015 }} Nina Shea, National Review (31 March 2011)</ref> The [[Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam]] subjects free speech to unspecified Sharia restrictions: Article 22(a) of the Declaration states that "Everyone shall have the right to express his opinion freely in such manner as would not be contrary to the principles of the Shariah."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/cairodeclaration.html |title=University of Minnesota Human Rights Library |access-date=13 January 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181103121418/http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/instree/cairodeclaration.html |archive-date=3 November 2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> Others, in contrast, consider blasphemy laws to violate freedom of speech,<ref>Brian Winston (2014), The Rushdie Fatwa and After: A Lesson to the Circumspect, Palgrave Macmillan, {{ISBN|978-1137388599}}, p. 74, Quote: "(In the case of blasphemy and Salman Rushdie) the death sentence it pronounced was grounded in a jurisprudential gloss on the Surah al-Ahzab (33:57)"</ref> stating that freedom of expression is essential to empowering both Muslims and non-Muslims, and point to the abuse of blasphemy laws in prosecuting members of religious minorities, political opponents, and settling personal scores.<ref>[https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21635070-pakistans-blasphemy-laws-legitimise-intolerance-bad-mouthing Bad-mouthing: Pakistan's blasphemy laws legitimise intolerance] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170910235624/https://www.economist.com/news/asia/21635070-pakistans-blasphemy-laws-legitimise-intolerance-bad-mouthing |date=10 September 2017 }} The Economist (29 November 2014)</ref><ref>[https://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2015/01/johnson-blasphemy Blasphemy: Dangerous words] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170707161612/https://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2015/01/johnson-blasphemy |date=7 July 2017 }} The Economist (7 January 2015)</ref><ref name=bbc-blasphemy>{{cite web|title=What are Pakistan's blasphemy laws?|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-12621225|website=BBC News|access-date=18 April 2019|date=6 November 2014|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190405093821/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-12621225|archive-date=5 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Blasphemy law in Pakistan|In Pakistan, blasphemy laws]] have been used to convict more than a thousand people, about half of them [[Ahmadi]]s and [[Christians]].<ref name="Böwering">{{cite book |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=q1I0pcrFFSUC&pg=PA72 |page= 72 |title= The Princeton Encyclopedia of Islamic Political Thought |editor= Gerhard Böwering |editor2= Patricia Crone |editor3= Mahan Mirza |publisher= Princeton University Press |year= 2013 |isbn= 978-0691134840 |access-date= 18 April 2019 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20190406141758/https://books.google.com/books?id=q1I0pcrFFSUC&pg=PA72 |archive-date= 6 April 2019 |url-status= live }}</ref><ref name=bbc-blasphemy/> While none have been legally executed,<ref name="Böwering"/> two Pakistani politicians, [[Shahbaz Bhatti]] and [[Salmaan Taseer]], have been assassinated over their criticism of the blasphemy laws. The Pakistani blasphemy laws are based upon [[Indian Penal Code|colonial-era legislation]], which made it a "crime to disturb a religious assembly, trespass on burial grounds, insult religious beliefs or intentionally destroy or defile a place or an object of worship", with these laws being modified between 1980 and 1986 by the [[Government of Pakistan|military government]] of General [[Zia-ul Haq]] to make them more severe. A number of clauses were added by the government in order to [[Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq#'Sharization' of Pakistan|"Islamicise" the laws]] and deny the Muslim character of the [[Ahmadi]] minority.<ref name=bbc-blasphemy/>

==== Apostasy ====
{{Main|Apostasy in Islam}}
[[File:Apostasy laws world map.svg|alt=|thumb|upright=1.15|Countries that criminalize [[Apostasy in Islam|apostasy from Islam]] as of 2020. Some Muslim-majority countries impose the death penalty or a prison sentence for apostasy from Islam or ban non-Muslims from proselytizing .<ref>[http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/28/which-countries-still-outlaw-apostasy-and-blasphemy/ Which countries still outlaw apostasy and blasphemy?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160725201505/http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/28/which-countries-still-outlaw-apostasy-and-blasphemy/ |date=25 July 2016 }} Pew Research Center, United States (May 2014)</ref>]]
[[File:Execution of a Moroccan Jewess by Alfred Dehodencq.jpg|thumb|left| Execution of a [[Moroccan Jews|Moroccan Jewish]] woman ([[Sol Hachuel]]) on the grounds of leaving Islam ([[Apostasy in Islam|apostasy]]), painting by [[Alfred Dehodencq]]]]
According to Islam, apostasy from Islam is a sin<ref name=jstor-1570336>{{cite journal |last1=Peters |first1=Rudolph |last2=Vries |first2=Gert J. J. De |title=Apostasy in Islam |journal=Die Welt des Islams |date=1976 |volume=17 |issue=1/4 |pages=1–25 |doi= 10.2307/1570336 |jstor=1570336}}</ref><ref name="Lewis-1995-229">{{cite book|last1= Lewis|first1= Bernard|title= The Middle East, a Brief History of the Last 2000 Years|date= 1995|publisher= Touchstone Books|isbn= 978-0684807126|page= 229|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=1ajwK7ejowwC&q=%22crime+as+well+as+a+sin%22+lewis&pg=PT234|access-date= 27 November 2015|archive-date= 27 December 2020|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213725/https://books.google.com/books?id=1ajwK7ejowwC&q=%22crime+as+well+as+a+sin%22+lewis&pg=PT234|url-status= live}}</ref> while [[Al-Baqara 256]] says "there is no compulsion in religion".<ref name="qref|2|256">{{qref|2|256|b=yl}}</ref> Typically there is a waiting period to allow the apostate time to repent and to return to Islam.<ref name=jstor-1570336/><ref name=aromar/><ref name="KEY">{{cite book|author1= Kecia Ali|author2= Oliver Leaman|title= Islam: the key concepts|publisher= Routledge|year= 2008|page= 10|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=H5-CdzqmuXsC&pg=PA10|access-date= 29 November 2013|isbn= 978-0415396387|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131212074154/http://books.google.com/books?id=H5-CdzqmuXsC&pg=PA10|archive-date= 12 December 2013}}</ref><ref name=johnesposito>{{cite book|author= John L. Esposito|title= The Oxford dictionary of Islam|publisher= Oxford University Press|year= 2004|page= 22|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=6VeCWQfVNjkC&pg=PA22|access-date= 28 November 2013|isbn= 978-0195125597|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20131212075502/http://books.google.com/books?id=6VeCWQfVNjkC&pg=PA22|archive-date= 12 December 2013}}</ref> [[Wael Hallaq]] writes that "[in] a culture whose lynchpin is religion, religious principles and religious morality, apostasy is in some way equivalent to high treason in the modern nation-state".<ref name="waelhallaq">{{cite book|last1= Wael|first1= B. Hallaq|title= Sharī'a: Theory, Practice and Transformations|date= 2009|publisher= [[Cambridge University Press]]|isbn= 978-0-521-86147-2|page= 319|author1-link= Wael Hallaq}}</ref> Early Islamic jurists set the standard for apostasy from Islam so high that practically no apostasy verdict could be passed before the 11th century,<ref name="Princeton.Enc.2013">{{cite book |editor1=Gerhard Bowering|others=associate editors Patricia Crone, Wadid Kadi, Devin J. Stewart and Muhammad Qasim Zaman; assistant editor Mahan Mirza|title = The Princeton encyclopedia of Islamic political thought |date = 2013 |publisher = [[Princeton University Press]] |location = Princeton, N.J. |isbn = 978-0691134840 |page = 40}}</ref> but later jurists lowered the bar for applying the death penalty, allowing judges to interpret the apostasy law in different ways,<ref name="Princeton.Enc.2013"/> which they did sometimes leniently and sometimes strictly.{{sfn|Vikør|2005|p=291}} In the late 19th century, criminal penalties for apostasy fell into disuse, although civil penalties were still applied.<ref name=jstor-1570336/>

Some Islamic jurists continue to regard apostasy as a crime deserving the [[Capital and corporal punishment in Islam|death penalty]].<ref name=aromar>{{cite book|last= Omar|first= Abdul Rashied|editor1= Mohammed Abu-Nimer|editor2= David Augsburger|title= Peace-Building by, between, and beyond Muslims and Evangelical Christians|chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=HvrDWka4iRgC&pg=186|year=2009|publisher= Lexington Books|chapter= The Right to religious conversion: Between apostasy and proselytization|isbn= 978-0-7391-3523-5|pages= 179–94|url-status=live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20160111010040/https://books.google.com/books?id=HvrDWka4iRgC&pg=186|archive-date= 11 January 2016}}</ref> A number of liberal and progressive Islamic scholars have argued that apostasy should not be viewed as a crime.<ref name="ELLIOTT-3-26-2006">{{cite news|last1=Elliott|first1=Andrea|title=In Kabul, a Test for Shariah|newspaper=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/weekinreview/26elliott.html?_r=0|access-date=28 November 2015|agency=New York Times|date=26 March 2006|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160111010040/http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/weekinreview/26elliott.html?_r=0|archive-date=11 January 2016}}</ref>
<ref name="news.bbc.co.uk">{{cite news |first=Magdi |last=Abdelhadi |date=27 March 2006 |title=What Islam says on religious freedom |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4850080.stm |work=BBC News |access-date=14 October 2009 |url-status=live |archive-date=11 February 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170211123527/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4850080.stm}}</ref><ref name=jstor-1570336/><ref name=bbcsudan>{{cite web |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27424064 |title=Sudan woman faces death for apostasy|work=BBC News |date=15 May 2014|url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140519054610/http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-27424064 |archive-date=19 May 2014 |quote=There is a long-running debate in Islam over whether apostasy is a crime. Some liberal scholars hold the view that it is not (...), Others say apostasy is (...). The latter is the dominant view in conservative Muslim states such as Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (...).}}</ref> Others argue that the death penalty is an inappropriate punishment,<ref name= hassanibrahim>{{cite book|first =Hassan|last= Ibrahim |editor-first= Ibrahim M.|editor-last= Abu-Rabi'|date=2006|title= The Blackwell Companion to Contemporary Islamic Thought|publisher= Blackwell Publishing|isbn =978-1-4051-2174-3|pages= 167–69}}</ref><ref name=smz>{{cite journal |last1=Zwemer |first1=Samuel M. |title=The Law of Apostasy |journal= The Muslim World |volume=14 |issue=4 |pages= 36–37, chapter 2 |issn= 0027-4909}}</ref> inconsistent with the Qur'anic verses such as [[Al-Baqara 256]] containing "no compulsion in religion";<ref name="ELLIOTT-3-26-2006"/> or that it was a man-made rule enacted in the early Islamic community to prevent and punish the equivalent of desertion or treason,<ref>{{cite book|author=John Esposito |year=2011|title=What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam|page=74|publisher=Oxford University Press |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2wSVQI3Ya2EC&pg=PA74|isbn=978-0199794133|author-link=John Esposito |access-date=18 April 2019 |url-status=live|archive-date=11 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611044119/https://books.google.com/books?id=2wSVQI3Ya2EC&pg=PA74}}</ref> and should be enforced only if apostasy becomes a mechanism of [[Fitna (word)|public disobedience and disorder]] (''fitna'').{{#tag:ref|According to the interpretation of [[Turkish Muslims|Turkish Muslim]] [[Islamic studies|scholar]] Ahmet Albayrak regarding apostasy from Islam as a form of wrongdoing, punishment for leaving Islam is not a sign of [[Religious intolerance|intolerance towards other religions]], and it is not aimed at one's freedom to leave Islam and [[Freedom of religion|to choose a different faith]]. In his opinion, it is more correct to say that the punishment is imposed as a safety precaution when conditions warrant the imposition of it; for example, the punishment is imposed if apostasy from Islam becomes a mechanism of [[Fitna (word)|public disobedience and disorder]] (''fitna'').<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Leaman |editor-first=Oliver |editor-link=Oliver Leaman |year=2006 |title=The Qur'an: An Encyclopedia |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=isDgI0-0Ip4C |location=London and New York |publisher=[[Routledge]] |edition=1st |pages=526–527 |isbn=9780415775298}}</ref>|group=Note}} According to [[Khaled Abou El Fadl]], moderate Muslims do not believe that apostasy requires punishment.<ref name="GTWIFE">{{cite book|last1=Abou El Fadl |first1=Khaled|title=The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists|year=2007 |publisher=HarperOne|isbn=978-0061189036|page=158|author1-link=Khaled Abou El Fadl}}</ref> The death penalty<ref>{{cite web |date=16 May 2014 |title=UN rights office deeply concerned over Sudanese woman facing death for apostasy |url=https://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=47810 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170417115144/http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=47810 |archive-date=17 April 2017 |access-date=17 April 2017 |website=UN News Centre}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |date=13 February 2012 |title=Saudi Arabia: Writer Faces Apostasy Trial |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/02/13/saudi-arabia-writer-faces-apostasy-trial |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170417114956/https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/02/13/saudi-arabia-writer-faces-apostasy-trial |archive-date=17 April 2017 |access-date=17 April 2017 |website=Human Rights Watch}}</ref> or other punishment for apostasy in Islam is a violation of universal [[human rights]], and an issue of [[freedom of faith]] and conscience.<ref name=hassanibrahim/><ref>{{cite book|title= Human Rights Diplomacy |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=U84ktW2N93QC&pg=64|year=1997|publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-15390-4|page=64|url-status=live|archive-date=11 January 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160111010039/https://books.google.com/books?id=U84ktW2N93QC&pg=64}}</ref>

Twenty-three Muslim-majority countries, {{as of | 2013 | lc = on}}, penalized apostasy from Islam through their [[criminal law]]s.<ref>[https://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/index.php Laws Criminalizing Apostasy] {{webarchive|url=http://archive.wikiwix.com/cache/20171231144725/https://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/index.php |date=31 December 2017 }} Library of Congress (2014)</ref>
{{As of | 2014}}, apostasy from Islam was a capital offense in Afghanistan, Brunei, Mauritania, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen.<ref name=locapo>[https://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/apostasy.pdf Laws Criminalizing Apostasy] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171011180050/http://www.loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/apostasy.pdf |date=11 October 2017 }} Library of Congress (2014)</ref><ref>[http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e174 Apostasy] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140904042337/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e174 |date=4 September 2014 }} Oxford Islamic Studies Online, Oxford University Press (2012)</ref> In other countries, Sharia courts could use family laws to void the Muslim apostate's [[marriage in Islam|marriage]] and to deny [[child custody|child-custody]] rights as well as [[inheritance]] rights.<ref>{{cite journal |last1= Zwemer |first1= Samuel M. |title= The Law of Apostasy |journal= The Muslim World |volume= 14 |issue=4 |pages= 41–43, Chapter 2 |issn= 0027-4909}}</ref> In the years 1985–2006, four individuals were legally executed for apostasy from Islam: "one in Sudan in 1985; two in Iran, in 1989 and 1998; and one in Saudi Arabia in 1992."<ref name="ELLIOTT-3-26-2006"/> While modern states have rarely prosecuted apostasy, the issue has a "deep cultural resonance" in some Muslim societies and Islamists have tended to exploit it for political gain.<ref name="ELLIOTT-3-26-2006"/> [[Apostasy in Islam#Public opinion|In a 2008–2012 Pew Research Center poll]], public support for capital punishment for apostasy among Muslims ranged from 78% in Afghanistan to less than 1% in Kazakhstan, reaching over 50% in 6 of the 20 countries surveyed.

==== LGBTQ rights ====
{{main|LGBTQ people and Islam}}
[[File:World laws pertaining to homosexual relationships and expression.svg|thumb|upright=1.15|Homosexual intercourse illegal: {{legend|#800000|[[Capital punishment|Death penalty]]}}{{legend|#cc6633|Death penalty on books but not applied}}
{{legend|#e73e21|Up to [[life in prison]]}}{{legend|#ec8028|Imprisonment}}{{legend|#f9dc36|Prison on books but not enforced}}]]
Homosexual intercourse is illegal in classical Sharia, with different penalties, including capital punishment, stipulated depending on the situation and legal school. In pre-modern Islam, the penalties prescribed for homosexual acts were "to a large extent theoretical" according to the ''[[Encyclopaedia of Islam]]'', owing in part to stringent procedural requirements for their harsher (''hudud'') forms and in part to prevailing social tolerance toward same-sex relationships.<ref name=EI2>{{Cite encyclopedia |year=2012 |title=Liwāṭ |encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia of Islam| edition=2nd|publisher=Brill |editor-last=Bearman |editor-first=P. |editor2-last=Bianquis |editor2-first=Th. |editor3-last=Bosworth |editor3-first=C.E. |editor4-last=van Donzel |editor4-first=E. |editor5-last=Heinrichs |editor5-first=W.P. |doi=10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_4677}}</ref> Historical instances of prosecution for homosexual acts are rare, and those which followed Sharia rules are even rarer.<ref name=iranica-law>{{cite encyclopedia |url=http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-ii|author=E. K. Rowson|title=Homosexuality in Islamic Law |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Iranica|year=2012|access-date=9 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190409045203/http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-ii|archive-date=9 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref> Public attitudes toward homosexuality in the Muslim world turned more negative starting from the 19th century through the [[International propagation of Salafism and Wahhabism|gradual spread]] of [[Islamic fundamentalism|Islamic fundamentalist movements]] such as [[Salafi movement|Salafism]] and [[Wahhabism]],<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Falaky |first1=Fayçal |title=Radical Islam, Tolerance, and the Enlightenment |journal=Studies in Eighteenth-Century Culture |date=2018 |volume=47 |pages=265–66 |doi=10.1353/sec.2018.0026 |s2cid=149570040 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Evans |first1=Daniel |title=Oppression and Subalternity: Homosexual and Transgender in Islam |journal=Journal of the International Relations and Affairs Group |date=2013 |volume=3 |issue=1 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oz_wBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA109 |pages=109–10 |isbn=978-1304399694 |access-date=18 December 2020 |url-status=live |archive-date=14 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514154958/https://books.google.com/books?id=oz_wBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA109}}</ref><ref name="dialmy">{{cite journal |last1=Dialmy |first1=Abdessamad |title=Sexuality and Islam |journal=The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care |date=13 May 2010 |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=160–68 |doi=10.3109/13625181003793339|pmid=20441406 |s2cid=1099061 }}</ref> and under the influence of sexual notions prevalent in Europe at that time.<ref name=lapidus>{{Cite book| author1=Ira M. Lapidus|author2=Lena Salaymeh |title=A History of Islamic Societies |publisher=Cambridge University Press |edition=Kindle |year=2014| isbn=978-0-521-51430-9 |pages=361–362}}</ref><ref name=beckers>Tilo Beckers, "Islam and the Acceptance of Homosexuality", in ''Islam and Homosexuality, Volume 1'', ed. Samar Habib, 64–65  (Praeger, 2009).</ref> A number of Muslim-majority<ref>{{Cite news |title=How homosexuality became a crime in the Middle East |url=https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/06/how-homosexuality-became-a-crime-in-the-middle-east |access-date=2024-05-09 |newspaper=The Economist |issn=0013-0613 |archive-date=3 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190703034324/https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/06/how-homosexuality-became-a-crime-in-the-middle-east |url-status=live }}</ref> countries have retained [[Criminalization of homosexuality|criminal penalties for homosexual acts]] enacted under colonial rule.<ref name=ahmadi>{{cite journal|journal=Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development|title=Islam and Homosexuality: Religious Dogma, Colonial Rule, and the Quest for Belonging|author=Shafiqa Ahmadi|volume=26|year=2012|issue=3 |pages=557–558 |url=https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1709&context=jcred |access-date=9 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190404044040/https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1709&context=jcred|archive-date=4 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=economist>{{cite news|newspaper=The Economist|title=How homosexuality became a crime in the Middle East|date=6 June 2018 |url=https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/06/how-homosexuality-became-a-crime-in-the-middle-east|access-date=9 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190407190245/https://www.economist.com/open-future/2018/06/06/how-homosexuality-became-a-crime-in-the-middle-east|archive-date=7 April 2019|url-status=live}}</ref> In recent decades, prejudice against LGBT individuals in the Muslim world has been exacerbated by increasingly conservative attitudes and the rise of Islamist movements, resulting in Sharia-based penalties enacted in several countries.<ref name=economist/> The [[Death penalty for homosexuality|death penalty for homosexual acts]] is currently a legal punishment in Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, some northern states in Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, parts of Somalia,  and Yemen, all of which have Sharia-based criminal laws. It is unclear whether the laws of Afghanistan and United Arab Emirates provide for the death penalty for gay sex, ''as they have never been carried out''.{{Update inline|date=May 2024}}<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=Afghanistan |title=The Death Penalty in Afghanistan |publisher=Death Penalty Worldwide |access-date=25 August 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170914020231/http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/country-search-post.cfm?country=Afghanistan |archive-date=14 September 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="WP">{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here-are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/|title=Analysis – Here are the 10 countries where homosexuality may be punished by death|first1=Max|last1=Bearak|first2=Darla|last2=Cameron|date=16 June 2016|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=9 April 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161111064457/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/06/13/here-are-the-10-countries-where-homosexuality-may-be-punished-by-death-2/|archive-date=11 November 2016|url-status=live}}</ref> Criminalization of consensual homosexual acts and especially making them liable to capital punishment has been condemned by international rights groups. [[LGBT in Islam#Opinion polls|According to polls]], the level of social acceptance for homosexuality ranges from 52% among Muslims in the U.S. to less than 10% in a number of Muslim-majority nations.

==== Women ====
{{main|Women in Islam|Islam and domestic violence}}
[[File:Odalisque (Boston Public Library).jpg|thumb|upright=0.8| A ''"[[cariye]]"'' or [[Ottoman Empire|Ottoman]] [[concubine]], painting by Gustav Richter (1823–1884)]]
===== Personal status and child marriage =====
Shari'a is the basis for personal status laws in most Islamic-majority nations. These personal status laws determine [[women's rights|rights of women]] in matters of marriage, divorce, and child custody. A 2011 [[UNICEF]] report mentions that Sharia law provisions differ for women in financial matters from general human rights provisions. In many countries, in legal proceedings relating to Sharia-based [[Shia Personal Status Law|personal status law]], in financial cases, a [[Status of women's testimony in Islam|woman's testimony is worth half of a man's]] before a court.<ref name=unicef2011>{{cite web |url=http://www.unicef.org/gender/files/REGIONAL-Gender-Eqaulity-Profile-2011.pdf |title=MENA Gender Equality Profile – Status of Girls and Women in the Middle East and North Africa, UNICEF (October 2011) |access-date=22 March 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120605134725/http://www.unicef.org/gender/files/REGIONAL-Gender-Eqaulity-Profile-2011.pdf |archive-date=5 June 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref>

The 1917 codification of Islamic family law in the [[Ottoman empire]] distinguished between the age of competence for marriage, which was set at 18 for boys and 17 for girls, and the minimum age for marriage, which followed the traditional Hanafi limits of 12 for boys and 9 for girls.  Marriage below the age of competence was permissible only if proof of sexual maturity was accepted in court, while marriage under the minimum age was forbidden. During the 20th century,  most countries in the Middle East followed the Ottoman precedent in defining the age of competence while raising the minimum age to 15 or 16 for boys and 13–16 for girls. Marriage below the age of competence is subject to approval by a judge and the legal guardian of the adolescent. Egypt diverged from this pattern by setting the age limits of 18 for boys and 16 for girls, without a distinction between competence for marriage and minimum age.<ref name=EI2-8-29>{{Cite encyclopedia|author1=Schacht, J.|author2= Layish, A.|author3= Shaham, R.|author4= Ansari, Ghaus|author5= Otto, J.M.|author6= Pompe, S.|author7= Knappert, J. |author8=Boyd, Jean| year=1995 | title=Nikāḥ|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia of Islam| edition=2nd|publisher=Brill |editor1=P. Bearman|editor2= Th. Bianquis|editor3= C.E. Bosworth|editor4= E. van Donzel|editor5= W.P. Heinrichs|volume=8|page=29}}</ref>

===== Property rights =====
Islamic law granted Muslim women certain legal rights, such as property rights which women in the West did not possess until "comparatively recent times".<ref>Bernard Lewis (2002), What Went Wrong?, {{ISBN|0195144201}}, p. 83</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Badawi |first=Jamal A. |title=The Status of Women in Islam |journal=Al-Ittihad Journal of Islamic Studies |volume=8 |issue=2 |date=September 1971}}{{page needed|date=July 2016}}</ref><ref name=Feldman>{{cite news |author-link=Noah Feldman |last=Feldman |first=Noah |title=Why Shariah? |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=16 March 2008 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?ei=5070&em=&en=5c1b8de536ce606f&ex=1205812800&pagewanted=all |access-date=17 September 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121116110730/http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?ei=5070&em=&en=5c1b8de536ce606f&ex=1205812800&pagewanted=all |archive-date=16 November 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref> Starting with the 20th century, Western legal systems evolved to expand women's rights, but women's rights in the Muslim world have to varying degree remained tied to the Quran, hadiths and their traditional interpretations by Islamic jurists.<ref name=alik/><ref>{{Cite journal |author=Hafez, Mohammed |title=Why Muslims Rebel |journal=Al-Ittihad Journal of Islamic Studies |volume=1 |issue=2 |date=September 2006 }}</ref> Sharia grants women the [[right to property|right to inherit property]] from other family members, and these rights are detailed in the Quran.{{sfn|Horrie|Chippindale|1991|p=49}} A woman's inheritance can be unequal if she inherits from her father, as daughters inherit half as much as their brothers.{{qref|4|11|b=y|s=y}}<ref name=davidpowers/>

===== Domestic violence =====
[[Jonathan A.C. Brown]] says:
<blockquote>The vast majority of the ulama across the Sunni schools of law inherited the Prophet's unease over domestic violence and placed further restrictions on the evident meaning of the 'Wife Beating Verse'. A leading Meccan scholar from the second generation of Muslims, [[Ata ibn Abi Rabah|Ata' bin Abi Rabah]], counseled a husband not to beat his wife even if she ignored him but rather to express his anger in some other way. [[Al-Darimi|Darimi]], a teacher of both [[Tirmidhi]] and [[Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj|Muslim bin Hajjaj]] as well as a leading early scholar in Iran, collected all the Hadiths showing Muhammad's disapproval of beating in a chapter entitled 'The Prohibition on Striking Women'. A thirteenth-century scholar from Granada, Ibn Faras, notes that one camp of ulama had staked out a stance forbidding striking a wife altogether, declaring it contrary to the Prophet's example and denying the authenticity of any Hadiths that seemed to permit beating. Even [[Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani|Ibn Hajar]], the pillar of late medieval Sunni Hadith scholarship, concludes that, contrary to what seems to be an explicit command in the Qur'an, the Hadiths of the Prophet leave no doubt that striking one's wife to discipline her actually falls under the Shariah ruling of 'strongly disliked' or 'disliked verging on prohibited'.<ref>Jonathan A.C. Brown, ''Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy'', [[Oneworld Publications]] (2014), pp. 275–276</ref></blockquote>

The [[An-Nisa, 34|Surah 4:34]], in the Quran, has been debated for domestic violence and also has been subject to [[An-Nisa, 34#Debates and discussion about the text|varied interpretations]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/4/34/men-are-given-authority-over-women-and-corrective-measures-for-disobedient-women-and-arbitration-in-family-disputes |title=Surah 4:34 (An-Nisaa), Alim&nbsp;– Translated by Mohammad Asad, Gibraltar (1980) |access-date=29 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927231420/http://www.alim.org/library/quran/ayah/compare/4/34/men-are-given-authority-over-women-and-corrective-measures-for-disobedient-women-and-arbitration-in-family-disputes |archive-date=27 September 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.eui.eu/DepartmentsAndCentres/RobertSchumanCentre/Research/InternationalTransnationalRelations/MediterraneanProgramme/MRM/MRM2011/ws04.aspx|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927154118/http://www.eui.eu/DepartmentsAndCentres/RobertSchumanCentre/Research/InternationalTransnationalRelations/MediterraneanProgramme/MRM/MRM2011/ws04.aspx|url-status=dead|title=Salhi and Grami (2011), Gender and Violence in the Middle East and North Africa, Florence (Italy), European University Institute|archivedate=27 September 2013}}</ref> According to some interpretations, Sharia condones certain forms of domestic violence against women, when a husband suspects ''[[nushuz]]'' (disobedience, disloyalty, rebellion, ill conduct) in his wife only after admonishing and staying away from the bed does not work.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Farid |last1=Esack |chapter=Islam and Gender Justice: Beyond Simplistic Apologia |chapter-url={{Google books|riz_cIdSq0gC |page=187 |plainurl=yes}} |pages=187–210 |editor1-first=John C. |editor1-last=Raines |editor2-first=Daniel C. |editor2-last=Maguire |year=2014 |title=What Men Owe to Women: Men's Voices from World Religions |publisher=SUNY |isbn=978-0791491553 }}</ref> These interpretations have been criticized as inconsistent with women's rights in domestic abuse cases.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Mathias |last1=Rohe |chapter=Shari'a in a European Context |chapter-url={{Google books|bY1sReuxDy0C |page=93 |plainurl=yes}} |pages=93–114 |editor1-first=Ralpho |editor1-last=Grillo |editor2-first=Roger |editor2-last=Ballard |editor3-first=Alessandro |editor3-last=Ferrari |editor4-first=André J. |editor4-last=Hoekema |editor5-first=Marcel |editor5-last=Maussen |editor6-first=Prakash |editor6-last=Shah |year=2009 |title=Legal Practice and Cultural Diversity |publisher=Ashgate |isbn=978-0754675471 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Funder |first1=Anna |title=''De Minimis Non Curat Lex'': The Clitoris, Culture and the Law |journal=Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems |volume=3 |issue=2 |year=1993 |pages=417–67}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first1=Zainah |last1=Anwar |chapter=Law-Making in the Name of Islam: Implications for Democratic Governance |chapter-url={{Google books|6Js6QXUbmjYC |page=121 |plainurl=yes}} |pages=[https://archive.org/details/islaminsoutheast0000unse/page/121 121–34] |editor1-first=K S |editor1-last=Nathan |editor2-first=Mohammad Hashim |editor2-last=Kamali |year=2005 |title=Islam in Southeast Asia: Political, Social and Strategic Challenges for the 21st Century |publisher=Institute of Southeast Asian Studies |isbn=978-9812302830 |url=https://archive.org/details/islaminsoutheast0000unse/page/121 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bakht |first1=Natasha |title=Family Arbitration Using Sharia Law: Examining Ontario's Arbitration Act and its Impact on Women |journal=Muslim World Journal of Human Rights |volume=1 |issue=1 |year=2007 |ssrn=1121953 |doi=10.2202/1554-4419.1022|s2cid=144491368 }}</ref> [[Musawah]], [[Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women|CEDAW]], KAFA and other organizations have proposed ways to modify Sharia-inspired laws to improve women's rights in Muslim-majority nations, including women's rights in domestic abuse cases.<ref>{{cite book |url=http://www.musawah.org/cedaw-and-muslim-family-laws-search-common-ground |title=CEDAW and Muslim Family Laws: In Search of Common Ground |year=2012 |publisher=[[Musawah]] |access-date=18 July 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160624100604/http://www.musawah.org/cedaw-and-muslim-family-laws-search-common-ground |archive-date=24 June 2016 |url-status=live }}{{page needed|date=July 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Brandt |first1=Michele |last2=Kaplan |first2=Jeffrey A. |title=The Tension between Women's Rights and Religious Rights: Reservations to Cedaw by Egypt, Bangladesh and Tunisia |journal=Journal of Law and Religion |volume=12 |issue=1 |year=1995 |pages=105–42 |jstor=1051612 |doi=10.2307/1051612|s2cid=154841891 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.irinnews.org/report/86247/lebanon-move-to-take-domestic-violence-cases-out-of-religious-courts |title=Lebanon – IRIN, United Nations Office of Humanitarian Affairs (2009) |work=IRINnews |date=22 September 2009 |access-date=31 July 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130812051407/http://www.irinnews.org/report/86247/lebanon-move-to-take-domestic-violence-cases-out-of-religious-courts |archive-date=12 August 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/10/19/uae-spousal-abuse-never-right |title=UAE: Spousal Abuse never a Right |date=19 October 2010 |publisher=[[Human Rights Watch]] |access-date=13 January 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170226083817/https://www.hrw.org/news/2010/10/19/uae-spousal-abuse-never-right |archive-date=26 February 2017 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Others believe that wife-beating is not consistent with a more modernist perspective of the Quran.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Hamid R. |last1=Kusha |chapter=Qur'anic Perspectives on Wife Abuse |pages=595–602 |editor1-first=Nicky Ali |editor1-last=Jackson |year=2007 |title=Encyclopedia of Domestic Violence |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-0415969680}}</ref> Many Imams and scholars who learned Shariah in traditional Islamic seminaries object to the misuse of this verse to justify domestic violence. Muslims for [[White Ribbon Campaign]] was launched in 2010 with Imams and Muslim leaders committing to join with others to work to end violence against women.<ref>{{cite web |title=Canadian Muslims Launch Annual White Ribbon Campaign |url=http://iqra.ca/2013/canadian-muslims-launch-annual-white-ribbon-campaign/ |website=Iqra.ca |date=15 November 2013 |access-date=12 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213746/http://iqra.ca/2013/canadian-muslims-launch-annual-white-ribbon-campaign/ |url-status=live }}</ref> [[Khutbah]] campaigns were held in many parts of the world to speak out against domestic violence and encourage Muslim congregants to eradicate domestic abuse.<ref>{{cite web |title=Call to Action to Eradicate Domestic Violence |url=http://iqra.ca/2011/call-to-action-to-eradicate-domestic-violence/ |website=Iqra.ca |date=16 November 2011 |access-date=12 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213810/http://iqra.ca/2011/call-to-action-to-eradicate-domestic-violence/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Muslim Council of Britain urges Imams to speak out against domestic abuse this Friday |url=https://mcb.org.uk/press-releases/muslim-council-of-britain-urges-imams-to-speak-out-against-domestic-abuse-this-friday/ |website=Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) |date=19 March 2014 |access-date=12 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213800/https://mcb.org.uk/press-releases/muslim-council-of-britain-urges-imams-to-speak-out-against-domestic-abuse-this-friday/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Stewart |first1=Philippa H. |title=Imams rally against domestic violence in the UK |website=www.aljazeera.com |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2016/03/imams-rally-domestic-violence-uk-160326110808840.html |access-date=12 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213800/https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2016/6/18/imams-rally-against-domestic-violence-in-the-uk |url-status=live }}</ref>

===== Rape =====
Rape is considered a serious crime in the Sharia law since the Islamic prophet Muhammad ordered rapists to be punished by stoning.<ref>{{cite book|author=Mohammad Hashim Kamali|title=Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: A Fresh Interpretation|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|page=67}}</ref>  The terms ''ghasaba'' and ''ightasaba'' have been used by traditional jurists when discussing sexual assault and its punishment. Imam Al-Shāfi'ī defined rape as: "Forcing a woman to commit zinā against her will". To the Ḥanafis, illegal intercourse is considered rape when there is no consent and no deliberate action from the victim. In Mālik's view, rape refers to any kind of unlawful sexual intercourse by usurpation and without consent. This includes instances when the condition of the victims prevents them from expressing their resistance, such as insanity, sleep, or being underage. The [[Hanbali]]tes, similar to the Mālikites, consider the use of any kind of force as a denial of consent from the victim. The threat of starvation or suffering the cold of winter is also regarded as being against one's will.<ref name="Noor">{{cite journal |last1=Noor |first1=Azman Mohd |date=1 January 2010 |title=Rape: A Problem of Crime Classification in Islamic Law |journal=Arab Law Quarterly |volume=24 |issue=4 |pages=417–438 |doi=10.1163/157302510X526724}}</ref>

==== Slavery ====
{{see also|Islamic views on slavery|Islamic views on concubinage}}
Sharia authorized the institution of slavery, using the words ''abd'' (slave) and the phrase ''ma malakat aymanukum'' ("that which your right hand owns") to refer to women slaves seized as captives of war.<ref name="blbr">* Bernard Lewis (2002), What Went Wrong?, {{ISBN|0195144201}}, pp. 82–83;
* Brunschvig. 'Abd; Encyclopedia of Islam, Brill, 2nd Edition, Vol 1, pp. 13–40.</ref><ref>[http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml Slavery in Islam] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181006015406/http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/islam/history/slavery_1.shtml |date=6 October 2018 }} BBC Religions Archives</ref> Under Islamic law, Muslim men could have sexual relations with female captives and slaves.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Mazrui |first1=Ali A. |title=Islamic and Western Values |journal=Foreign Affairs |volume=76 |issue=5 |year=1997 |pages=118–32 |jstor=20048203 |doi=10.2307/20048203}}</ref><ref name=alik>Ali, K. (2010). Marriage and slavery in early Islam. Harvard University Press.{{page needed|date=July 2016}}</ref><ref>Sikainga, Ahmad A. (1996). Slaves Into Workers: Emancipation and Labor in Colonial Sudan. University of Texas Press. {{ISBN|0292776942}}.</ref><ref>Tucker, Judith E.; Nashat, Guity (1999). Women in the Middle East and North Africa. Indiana University Press. {{ISBN|0253212642}}.</ref> Sharia, in Islam's history, provided a religious foundation for enslaving non-Muslim women and men but allowed for the [[manumission]] of slaves.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Jean Pierre Angenot |title=Uncovering the History of Africans in Asia |page=60 |isbn=978-9004162914 |publisher=Brill Academic |date=2008 |quote=Islam imposed upon the Muslim master an obligation to convert non-Muslim slaves and become members of the greater Muslim society. Indeed, the daily observation of well defined Islamic religious rituals was the outward manifestation of conversion without which emancipation was impossible.|display-authors=etal}}</ref><ref name=pl1>{{cite book |last1=Lovejoy |first1=Paul |title=Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa |date=2000 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-0521784306 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/transformationsi0000love/page/16 16–17] |quote=The religious requirement that new slaves be pagans and need for continued imports to maintain slave population made Africa an important source of slaves for the Islamic world. (...) In Islamic tradition, slavery was perceived as a means of converting non-Muslims. One task of the master was religious instruction and theoretically Muslims could not be enslaved. Conversion (of a non-Muslim to Islam) did not automatically lead to emancipation, but assimilation into Muslim society was deemed a prerequisite for emancipation. |url=https://archive.org/details/transformationsi0000love/page/16}}</ref> A slave woman who bore a child to her Muslim master (''umm al-walad'') could not be sold, becoming legally free upon her master's death and the child was considered free and a legitimate heir of the father.<ref>{{cite book |author=Kecia Ali |title=Slavery and Sexual Ethics in Islam, in Beyond Slavery: Overcoming Its Religious and Sexual Legacies |editor=Bernadette J. Brooten |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |isbn=978-0230100169 |pages=107–119 |quote=The slave who bore her master's child became known in Arabic as an "umm walad"; she could not be sold, and she was automatically freed upon her master's death. [p. 113]|date=15 October 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia|title=Umm al-Walad|editor=John L. Esposito|encyclopedia=The Oxford Dictionary of Islam |publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2014 |url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2424|access-date=18 March 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170801050417/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e2424 |archive-date=1 August 2017 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

==== Terrorism ====
{{further|Islamic terrorism|Islamic extremism|Jihad|Jihadism|Salafi jihadism}}
[[File:North face south tower after plane strike 9-11.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Al-Qaeda]] ideologues have used their interpretation of Sharia to justify terrorist attacks.]]
Some [[Islamic extremism|extremists]] have used their interpretation of Islamic scriptures and Sharia, in particular the doctrine of [[jihad]], to justify acts of war and terror against Muslim as well as non-Muslim individuals and governments.<ref name=aenexeter/>{{sfn|Horrie|Chippindale|1991|p=4}}{{sfn|Horrie|Chippindale|1991|p=100}} The expert on terrorism [[Rachel Ehrenfeld]] wrote that the "Sharia's finance ([[Islamic banking and finance|Islamic banking]]) is a new weapon in the arsenal of what might be termed [[Generations of warfare#Fifth generation|fifth-generation warfare (5GW)]]".<ref name=ZakatForTerror2>{{cite book |last= Norwitz |first= Jeffrey H. | title = Pirates, Terrorists, and Warlords: The History, Influence, and Future of Armed Groups Around the World | publisher = [[Skyhorse Publishing]] | location = New York| year = 2009 | pages = 84–86}}</ref> However, Sharia-compliant financing actually requires a person to stay away from weapons manufacturing.<ref name="Jamaldeen">{{cite web |last1=Jamaldeen |first1=Faleel |title=Seven Prohibited Industries in Islamic Financial Investments |url=https://www.dummies.com/personal-finance/islamic-finance/seven-prohibited-industries-in-islamic-financial-investments/ |access-date=7 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213729/https://www.dummies.com/personal-finance/islamic-finance/seven-prohibited-industries-in-islamic-financial-investments/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="JamesChen">{{cite web |last1=Chen |first1=James |title=Shariah-Compliant Funds |url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shariah-compliant-funds.asp |website=Investopedia |access-date=7 September 2020 |archive-date=27 December 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201227213729/https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/shariah-compliant-funds.asp |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Todorof |first1=Maria |title=Shariah-compliant FinTech in the banking industry |journal=ERA Forum |date=1 August 2018 |volume=19 |issue=1 |pages=1–17 |doi=10.1007/s12027-018-0505-8|doi-access=free }}</ref>

In classical fiqh, the term ''jihad'' refers to armed struggle against oppressors.<ref name=OEIP>{{cite encyclopedia|first1=Rudolph|last1=Peters|first2=David|last2=Cook|title=Jihād|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Politics|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2014|isbn=978-0199739356 |url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t349/e0057 |access-date=16 April 2019 |doi=10.1093/acref:oiso/9780199739356.001.0001 |url-status=live|archive-date=23 January 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170123114402/http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref:oiso/9780199739356.001.0001/acref-9780199739356-e-0263}}</ref><ref>{{Cite encyclopedia|author=Tyan, E. | year= 2012 | title=D̲j̲ihād|encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia of Islam| edition=2nd|publisher=Brill |editor=P. Bearman |editor2=Th. Bianquis |editor3=C.E. Bosworth |editor4=E. van Donzel |editor5=W.P. Heinrichs| doi= 10.1163/1573-3912_islam_COM_0189 }}</ref> Classical jurists developed an elaborate set of rules pertaining to jihad, including prohibitions on harming those who are not engaged in combat.<ref>{{cite web |author=Bernard Lewis |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1001547201928681240 |title=Jihad vs. Crusade |publisher=Opinionjournal.com |date=27 September 2001 |access-date=4 August 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160816162048/http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1001547201928681240 |archive-date=16 August 2016 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last=Blankinship|first=Khalid Yahya|author-link=Khalid Yahya Blankinship|year=2011|title=Parity of Muslim and Western Concepts of Just War|journal=The Muslim World|volume=101|issue=3|page=416|doi=10.1111/j.1478-1913.2011.01384.x|issn=1478-1913|quote=In classical Muslim doctrine on war, likewise, genuine non-combatants are not to be harmed. These include women, minors, servants and slaves who do not take part in the fighting, the blind, monks, hermits, the aged, those physically unable to fight, the insane, the delirious, farmers who do not fight, traders, merchants, and contractors. The main criterion distinguishing combatants from non-combatants is that the latter do not fight and do not contribute to the war effort.}}</ref> According to [[Bernard Lewis]], "[a]t no time did the classical jurists offer any approval or legitimacy to what we nowadays call terrorism"<ref>Bernard Lewis (with Buntzie Ellis Churchill) 'Islam: The Religion and the People' (2008). Pearson Prentice Hall. p. 151</ref> and the terrorist practice of suicide bombing "has no justification in terms of Islamic theology, law or tradition".<ref>Bernard Lewis (with Buntzie Ellis Churchill) 'Islam: The Religion and the People' (2008). Pearson Prentice Hall p. 153</ref> In the modern era the notion of jihad has lost its jurisprudential relevance and instead gave rise to an ideological and political discourse.<ref name=hallaq334>{{cite book |author=Wael B. Hallaq |title=Sharī'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IbOtAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA335 |year=2009 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |page=335 |isbn=978-1107394124 |access-date=13 January 2017 |archive-date=12 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161212220338/https://books.google.com/books?id=IbOtAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA335 |url-status=live}}</ref> While modernist Islamic scholars have emphasized defensive and non-military aspects of jihad, some radicals have advanced aggressive interpretations that go beyond the classical theory.<ref name=hallaq334/> For al-Qaeda ideologues, in jihad, all means are legitimate, including targeting Muslim non-combatants and the mass killing of non-Muslim civilians.<ref name=aenexeter/>

Some modern ulema, such as [[Yusuf al-Qaradawi]] and [[Sulaiman Al-Alwan]], have supported attacks against Israeli army reservists and hence should be considered soldiers, while [[Hamid bin Abdallah al-Ali]] declared that suicide attacks in Chechnya were justified as a "sacrifice".<ref name=aenexeter/><ref>[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3874893.stm Controversial preacher with 'star status'] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161229043134/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/3874893.stm |date=29 December 2016 }} BBC article, by Agdi Abdelhadi on 7 July 2004</ref> Many prominent Islamic scholars, including al-Qaradawi himself, have issued condemnations of terrorism in general terms.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/ |title=Islamic Statements Against Terrorism |author=Charles Kurzman |access-date=13 January 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190410093855/http://kurzman.unc.edu/islamic-statements-against-terrorism/ |archive-date=10 April 2019 |url-status=live }}</ref> For example, [[Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Al ash-Sheikh]], the [[Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia]] has stated that "terrorizing innocent people [...] constitute[s] a form of injustice that cannot be tolerated by Islam", while [[Muhammad Sayyid Tantawy]], [[Grand Imam of al-Azhar]] and former [[Grand Mufti]] of Egypt has stated that "attacking innocent people is not courageous; it is stupid and will be punished on the Day of Judgment".<ref name=aenexeter>Anisseh Engeland-Nourai, [https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10036/3417/VanEngeland_THE%20CHALLENGE%20OF%20FRAGMENTATION%20OF%20INTERNATIONAL%20HUMANITARIAN%20LAW.pdf?sequence=6 The Challenge of Fragmentation of International Humanitarian Law Regarding the Protection of Civilians – An Islamic Perspective] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150122043455/https://ore.exeter.ac.uk/repository/bitstream/handle/10036/3417/VanEngeland_THE%20CHALLENGE%20OF%20FRAGMENTATION%20OF%20INTERNATIONAL%20HUMANITARIAN%20LAW.pdf?sequence=6 |date=22 January 2015 }} School of Law, University of Bedfordshire, pp. 18–25</ref><ref>Ira Lapidus, ''The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic World edited by Francis Robinson''. Cambridge University Press, 1996, pp. 297–98. See Bibliography for Conclusion.</ref>