Filling Gaps in Legislation: The Use of Fiqh in Contemporary Courts in Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia

B. Dupret, Adil Bouhya, M. Lindbekk, Ayang Utriza Yakin
{"title":"Filling Gaps in Legislation: The Use of Fiqh in Contemporary Courts in Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia","authors":"B. Dupret, Adil Bouhya, M. Lindbekk, Ayang Utriza Yakin","doi":"10.1163/15685195-00264P03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In most Muslim-majority countries, the legislators who drafted family law codes sought to produce a codified version of one of the many Islamic fiqh schools. Such is the case, from West to East, for Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia. There are situations, however, in which the law remains silent. In such cases, judges must turn to fiqh in order to find appropriate provisions. It is up to judges to interpret the law and to locate the relevant rule. In this process, judges use new interpretive techniques and modes of reasoning. After addressing institutional and legal transformations in Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia, this article focuses on the domain of family law. We examine cases that illustrate how judges seek a solution in the body of fiqh when asked to authenticate a marriage. In conclusion, we put forward an argument about how judges who are required to refer to fiqh deal with this matter within the context of positive, codified, and standardized law. We argue that the methodology and epistemology adopted by contemporary judges, the legal material on which they draw, and the means by which they refer to this material have fundamentally altered the nature of legal cognition and of law itself.","PeriodicalId":237807,"journal":{"name":"Positive Law from the Muslim World","volume":"180 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Positive Law from the Muslim World","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15685195-00264P03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

In most Muslim-majority countries, the legislators who drafted family law codes sought to produce a codified version of one of the many Islamic fiqh schools. Such is the case, from West to East, for Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia. There are situations, however, in which the law remains silent. In such cases, judges must turn to fiqh in order to find appropriate provisions. It is up to judges to interpret the law and to locate the relevant rule. In this process, judges use new interpretive techniques and modes of reasoning. After addressing institutional and legal transformations in Morocco, Egypt, and Indonesia, this article focuses on the domain of family law. We examine cases that illustrate how judges seek a solution in the body of fiqh when asked to authenticate a marriage. In conclusion, we put forward an argument about how judges who are required to refer to fiqh deal with this matter within the context of positive, codified, and standardized law. We argue that the methodology and epistemology adopted by contemporary judges, the legal material on which they draw, and the means by which they refer to this material have fundamentally altered the nature of legal cognition and of law itself.
填补立法空白:在摩洛哥、埃及和印度尼西亚的当代法庭中使用伊斯兰教
在大多数穆斯林占多数的国家,起草家庭法典的立法者试图为众多伊斯兰教法学校之一制定一套法典。从西方到东方,摩洛哥、埃及和印度尼西亚都是如此。然而,在某些情况下,法律保持沉默。在这种情况下,法官必须求助于法律,以便找到适当的规定。这取决于法官对法律的解释和对相关规则的定位。在这个过程中,法官使用新的解释技巧和推理模式。在讨论了摩洛哥、埃及和印度尼西亚的制度和法律变革之后,本文将重点讨论家庭法领域。我们研究了一些案例,说明了当被要求验证婚姻时,法官如何在伊斯兰教中寻求解决方案。最后,我们提出了一个论点,即被要求参考fiqh的法官如何在积极的、编纂的和标准化的法律背景下处理这一问题。我们认为,当代法官所采用的方法论和认识论,他们所借鉴的法律材料,以及他们引用这些材料的手段,已经从根本上改变了法律认知和法律本身的本质。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信