Application of Sharia by country
means Islamic law based on Islamic concepts based from Quran and Hadith. Since the early Islamic states of the eighth and ninth centuries, Sharia always existed alongside other normative systems.
Historically, Sharia was interpreted by independent jurists, based on Islamic scriptural sources and various legal methodologies. In the modern era, statutes inspired by European codes replaced traditional laws in most parts of the Muslim world, with classical Sharia rules retained mainly in personal status laws. Countries such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have Islam as their state religion, but haven’t implemented Sharia law fully. These laws were codified by legislative bodies which sought to modernize them without abandoning their foundations in traditional jurisprudence. The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamist movements for full implementation of Sharia, including hudud capital punishments, such as stoning, which in some cases resulted in traditionalist legal reform. Some countries with Muslim minorities use Sharia-based laws to regulate banking, economics, inheritance, marriage and other governmental and personal affairs of their Muslim population. The use of Sharia in non-Muslim countries and on non-Muslims is debated.Historical background
is a religious law forming part of the Islamic tradition. Traditional theory of Islamic jurisprudence recognizes four sources of Sharia: the Quran, sunnah, qiyas, and ijma. Different legal schools—of which the most prominent are Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanbali and Jafari —developed methodologies for deriving Sharia rulings from scriptural sources. Traditional jurisprudence distinguishes two principal branches of law, ʿibādāt and muʿāmalāt, which together comprise a wide range of topics. Thus, some areas of Sharia overlap with the Western notion of law while others correspond more broadly to living life in accordance with God's will.
Classical jurisprudence was elaborated by private religious scholars, largely through legal opinions issued by qualified jurists. It was historically applied in Sharia courts by ruler-appointed judges, who dealt mainly with civil disputes and community affairs. Sultanic courts, the police and market inspectors administered criminal justice, which was influenced by Sharia but not bound by its rules. Non-Muslim communities had legal autonomy to adjudicate their internal affairs. Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually incorporated into state bureaucracies, and fiqh was complemented by various economic, criminal and administrative laws issued by Muslim rulers. The Ottoman civil code of 1869–1876 was the first partial attempt to codify Sharia.
In the modern era, traditional laws in the Muslim world have been widely replaced by statutes inspired by European models. Judicial procedures and legal education were likewise brought in line with European practice. While the constitutions of most Muslim-majority states contain references to Sharia, its classical rules were largely retained only in personal status law. Legislators who codified these laws sought to modernize them without abandoning their foundations in traditional jurisprudence. The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamist movements for full implementation of Sharia, including hudud capital punishments, such as stoning. In some cases, this resulted in traditionalist legal reform, while other countries witnessed juridical reinterpretation of Sharia advocated by progressive reformers. While hudud punishments hold symbolic importance for their proponents and have attracted international attention, in countries where they make part of the legal system, they have been used infrequently or not at all, and their application has varied depending on local political climate.
Some Muslim-minority countries recognize the use of Sharia-based family laws for their Muslim populations. The adoption and demand for Sharia in the legal system of nations with significant Muslim-minorities is an active topic of international debate. Reintroducing Sharia in Muslim-majority nations has been described as "a longstanding goal for Islamist movements", and attempts to introduce or expand Sharia have been accompanied by controversy, violence, and even warfare.The legal systems of Muslim countries may be grouped as: secular systems, mixed systems, and classical Sharia systems.Secular systems
Secular systems are those where Sharia plays no role in the nation's legal system and religious interference in state affairs, politics, and law is not permitted. Turkey has been an example of a Muslim-majority nation with a secular system,. Several states in West Africa and Central Asia also describe themselves as secular.Mixed systems
Most Muslim countries have mixed legal systems that postulate a constitution and rule of law, while also allowing rules of traditional Islamic jurisprudence to influence certain areas of national law. These systems possess large bodies of codified laws, which may be based on European or Indian codes. In these systems, the central legislative role is played by politicians and modern jurists rather than traditional religious scholars. Pakistan, Egypt, Malaysia, and Nigeria are examples of states having mixed systems. Some states with Muslim minorities, such as Israel, also have mixed systems that administer Sharia for their Muslim population.Classical Sharia systems
Under this system, shared by a small minority of modern countries, classical Sharia is formally equated with national law and to a great extent provides its substance. The state has a ruler who functions as the highest judiciary and may promulgate and modify laws in some legal domains, but traditional religious scholars play a decisive role in interpreting Sharia. The classical Sharia system is exemplified by Saudi Arabia and some Gulf states. Iran shares many of the same features, but also possesses characteristics of mixed legal systems, such as a parliament and codified laws.Domains of application
Constitutional law
Most Muslim-majority countries incorporate Sharia at some level in their legal framework. Their constitutions commonly 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. 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. Conversely, some countries, whose constitution does not mention Sharia, possess Sharia-based family laws. Nisrine Abiad identifies Bahrain, Iran, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia as states with "strong constitutional consequences" of Sharia "on the organization and functioning of power".Family law
Except for secular systems, Muslim-majority countries possess Sharia-based family laws. 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. In Greece, Indonesia, Nigeria, Senegal, and in the UK people can choose whether to pursue a case in a Sharia or secular court.Criminal law
Countries in the Muslim world generally have criminal codes influenced by French law or common law, and in some cases a combination of Western legal traditions. In the course of Islamization campaigns, several countries 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 and diya. Iran subsequently issued a new "Islamic Penal Code". Saudi Arabia has never adopted a criminal code and Saudi judges still follow traditional Hanbali jurisprudence. The criminal code of Afghanistan contain a general provision that certain crimes are to be punished according to Sharia, without specifying the penalties. In United Arab Emirates, Sharia in criminal law is only applicable in determining diyah amounts. Some Nigerian states have also enacted Islamic criminal laws. Laws in the Indonesian province of Aceh provide for application of discretionary punishments for violation of Islamic norms, but explicitly exclude hudud and qisas. Brunei has been implementing a "Sharia Penal Code", which includes provisions for stoning and amputation, in stages since 2014. The countries where hudud penalties are legal do not use stoning and amputation routinely, and generally apply other punishments instead.Map
Africa
Algeria
Article 222 of the Family Code of 1983 specifies Sharia as the residuary source of laws. According to the U.S. State Department, the Sharia-derived family code treats women as minors under the legal guardianship of a husband or male relative, though in practice the implied restrictions are not uniformly enforced.Benin
It has a civil law system with influences from customary law.Burkina Faso
It has a civil law system.Cameroon
It has a mixed legal system of English common law, French civil law, and customary law.After gaining independence from France, Chad retained the French legal system.Comoros
The legal system is based on both Sharia and remnants of the French legal code. According to the article 229-7 of the Penal Code, any Muslim who makes use of products forbidden by Sharia can be punished by imprisonment of up to six months.Côte d'Ivoire
It has a civil law system.