Law of Afghanistan

Last updated

The law in Afghanistan is the uncodified Sharia (Islamic law), interpreted according to the Hanafi jurisprudential school. [1] The ruling Taliban has maintained a strict Hanafi-only approach, ignoring enumeration of international rights, that bears greater similarity to Iran and its "Ja'fari only" jurisprudential stance than countries like Pakistan which follow a non-exclusive parliamentary approach to Islamic law. [2] Whilst opposing codification, in the past, the Taliban written policy has instructed judiciary to consult the Mecelle, a late Ottoman codification of Hanafi Mu'amalat, in matters of civil law. [3]

Contents

History

The legal system of Afghanistan has held consists of Islamic, statutory and customary rules. It has developed over centuries and is currently changing in the context of the rebuilding of the Afghan state. The supreme law of the land is currently Sharia however there is complex legislation that stems from different historical periods.

For instance, the so-called four volumes of civil law were developed on the basis of Egyptian models and promulgated in the time of the monarchy. Other legislation came into force under of President Daoud Khan, the Democratic Republic (1978-1992), the Mujahideen (1992-1996), the first Taliban regime (1996-2001), the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan (2004–2021) and the current Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. In the prior constitution of the Islamic republic, article 130 of the Afghan Constitution established that judges must apply the constitution and legislation and may only resort to Hanafi fiqh (one of the Schools of Islamic Law) if a necessary legal rule cannot be found in the written laws. [4]

Prior Judicature

During the Republican era, the Judicial system consisted of five major courts:

  1. The Supreme court: with the highest authority with nine members including the chief appointed by the president and the house of the people per Articles 117 and 118 of the Constitution.
  2. The court of Appeals: composed of the chief, the heads of Dewans , and other judicial members. Selection is based on experience and qualification. Per Article 31, the head of the General Criminal Dewan commonly serves as deputy head of the Court of Appeals.
  3. The Primary courts: according to Article 40, primary courts are generally established within the Court of Appeal jurisdictions. New courts can be founded in the centers of provinces, with the approval of the Supreme court president.
  4. The Juvenile court: this court is part of the primary court of every province and is made up of the head and three judicial members. The fundamental laws of this court follow Article 44.
  5. The Commercial court: this optional court system can be established within provinces, and composed of the chief and four other judicial members. Per Article 45, commercial cases can be deliberated under Primary court when commercial courts aren't available.

Court cases were generally handled at the primary and appeal stages by three major judges. The cessation stage could also have been deliberated with two or more participant judges, applying the constitution and laws of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. [5]

Judicial System

The Taliban purged the judiciary of the republican era, ending the appointment of those with training in modern Republican state legislation. The Amir al-Mu'minin (Supreme Leader) now directly appoints judiciary with the title of Shaykh, Mufti and Maulvi that suggest knowledge of prophetic tradition, Madrassa training and qualification to issue answers in Islamic law according to the Hanafi school. [6]

Court Structure

The Taliban operate a three-tiered court structure: [4]

  1. District courts: these primary courts are situated in well-known locations in most/all districts and hear cases on one or two days per week.
  2. Provincial courts: the second tier deals with appeals, more complicated cases as well as highly politicised cases - for instance, if a Taliban commander is implicated, local judiciary might be afraid to rule against him or be incapable of impartiality. Out of fear of the Taliban, many do not appeal.
  3. Supreme court: the final appeals court and the least clearly understood.

See also

Related Research Articles

The Hanafi school or Hanafism is one of the four major schools of Islamic jurisprudence within Sunni Islam. It was established by the 8th-century scholar, jurist, and theologian Abu Hanifa, a follower whose legal views were primarily preserved by his two disciples Abu Yusuf and Muhammad al-Shaybani. As the oldest and most-followed of the four major Sunni schools, it is also called the "school of the people of opinion". Many Hanafis also follow the Maturidi school of theology.

Special Clerical Court, or Special Court for Clerics is a special Iranian judicial system for prosecuting crimes, both ordinary and political, committed by Islamic clerics and scholars. The Special Clerical Court can defrock and disbar Islamic jurists, give sentences of imprisonment, corporal punishment, execution, etc. The court functions independently of the regular Iranian judicial framework, with its own security and prison systems, "generally secret and confidential" cases, proceedings and procedures, and is accountable only to the Supreme Leader of Iran,. The most senior Islamic politician to be prosecuted and sentenced to prison since the Iranian Revolution was Abdollah Nouri who was sentenced to five years in prison for political and religious dissent by the court in 1999.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the judicial system of Iran</span>

A nationwide judicial system in Iran was first implemented and established by Abdolhossein Teymourtash under Reza Shah, with further changes during the second Pahlavi era.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Afghanistan</span> Highest appeals court of Afghanistan

The Supreme Court of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, known locally as the Stera Mahkama, is the court of last resort of Afghanistan. Under the current Taliban government, the court has no independence or power of judicial review; the supreme leader of Afghanistan holds the ultimate authority to decide and interpret the law and may overturn any decision of any court. The current chief justice is Abdul Hakim Haqqani.

The judiciary of Afghanistan currently consists of the Supreme Court, appeals courts, civil courts and city courts. All justices of the appeals, civil and city courts are presided over by Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Egypt</span> Legal system of the Arab Republic of Egypt

The judicial system of Egypt is an independent branch of the Egyptian government which includes both secular and religious courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme court</span> Highest court in a jurisdiction

In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are binding on all other courts in a nation and are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts. A Supreme Court can also, in certain circumstances, act as a court of original jurisdiction, however, this is typically limited to constitutional law.

The law of Malaysia is mainly based on the common law legal system. This was a direct result of the colonisation of Malaya, Sarawak, and North Borneo by Britain between the early 19th century to the 1960s. The supreme law of the land—the Constitution of Malaysia—sets out the legal framework and rights of Malaysian citizens.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial review</span> Ability of courts to review actions by executive and legislatures

Judicial review is a process under which a government's executive, legislative, or administrative actions are subject to review by the judiciary. In a judicial review, a court may invalidate laws, acts, or governmental actions that are incompatible with a higher authority. For example, an executive decision may be invalidated for being unlawful, or a statute may be invalidated for violating the terms of a constitution. Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers—the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority. The doctrine varies between jurisdictions, so the procedure and scope of judicial review may differ between and within countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supreme Court of Albania</span> Highest court in Albanias judicial system

The Supreme Court of the Republic of Albania is the highest court of Albania and is the final court of appeals in the country's judicial system. It is composed of seventeen judges: the Chief Justice and sixteen Members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1964 Constitution of Afghanistan</span> Former monarchy constitution of Afghanistan

The 1964 Constitution of Afghanistan was the supreme law of the Kingdom of Afghanistan from 1964 to 1973, when it was annulled following a coup d'état though parts of the constitution were restored by future governments from 2002 to 2004 and from 2021 to 2022. It was drafted by a committee of foreign-educated Afghans, including Sardar Abdul Hakim Ziai and Sardar Abdul Rahim Ziai, appointed for the task by the Afghan King, Mohammad Zahir Shah. The primary goals of the Constitution were to prepare the government and the people for gradual movement toward democracy and socioeconomic modernization. A Loya jirga had debated, modified and approved its innovations, which included a bill of rights for all Afghans, explicitly including women. After public review, the constitution was put into effect in October 1964.

Sharia means Islamic law based on age-old concepts. Since the early Islamic states of the eighth and ninth centuries, Sharia always existed alongside other normative systems.

The judiciary of Somaliland is the judicial branch of the Somaliland government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Tanzania</span>

The Judiciary of Tanzania is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in Tanzania. The current judiciary bases its foundation to the constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977. Under the Constitution of Tanzania, Justices and Magistrates are independent of the government and subject only to the Constitution and the law. The country has a dual juristition system where there is a judicial structure responsible for Tanzania Mainland and another for Zanzibar. The Court of Appeal of the United Republic was established in 1979 as the final appellate judicial body with jurisdiction over the entire union.

The judicial system of the United Arab Emirates is divided into federal courts and local courts. The federal justice system is defined in the Constitution of the United Arab Emirates, with the Federal Supreme Court based at Abu Dhabi. As of 2023, only the emirates of Abu Dhabi, Dubai and Ras Al Khaimah have local court systems, while all other emirates use the federal court system for all legal proceedings.

The judiciary of the Philippines consists of the Supreme Court, which is established in the Constitution, and three levels of lower courts, which are established through law by the Congress of the Philippines. The Supreme Court has expansive powers, able to overrule political and administrative decisions, and with the ability to craft rules and law without precedent. It further determines the rules of procedure for lower courts, and its members sit on electoral tribunals.

The legal system of Sudan has evolved over time. The legacy of British colonial rule has had a significant impact even after independence. Most of the lawyers and judges were British trained and initially tended to rely on judicial precedent. Soon after independence, however, pressure began to build to change the legal system. By the time Jaafar Nimeiry seized power in 1969, a commission had been working on recommendations for a new system, but he dissolved it and formed another commission dominated by 12 Egyptian jurists. Based on recommendations received from them, Sudan adopted a new civil code that looked much like the Egyptian civil code of 1949. The new system was controversial because it disregarded existing laws and customs and introduced many new legal terms and concepts from Egyptian law without source material to interpret the codes. In 1973 the government repealed these codes and returned the legal system to its pre-1970 common-law status. In 1977 Nimeiry agreed to consider a Muslim Brotherhood demand that the system be based on Islam. He appointed al-Turabi as chairman of a committee to draft new Islamic laws. Nimeiry accepted few of the proposals from this committee. He then established a small, new group in 1983 that developed a “cut-and-paste” version of sharia laws based on practice in other countries. In September 1983, Nimeiry issued several decrees, known as the September Laws, which made sharia the law of the land.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran</span> One of the three forces in Islamic republic of Iran

The Islamic Republic of Iran was founded after the 1979 overthrow of the Pahlavi dynasty by the Islamic Revolution, and its legal code is based on Islamic law or sharia, although many aspects of civil law have been retained, and it is integrated into a civil law legal system. According to the constitution of the Islamic Republic, the judiciary in Iran "is an independent power". The entire legal system—"from the Supreme Court to regional courts, all the way down to local and revolutionary courts"—is under the purview of the Ministry of Justice, but in addition to a Minister of Justice and head of the Supreme Court, there is also a separate appointed Head of the Judiciary. Parliamentary bills pertaining to the constitution are vetted by the Council of Guardians.

The politics of Afghanistan are based on a totalitarian emirate within the Islamic theocracy in which the Taliban Movement holds a monopoly on power. Dissent is not permitted, and politics are mostly limited to internal Taliban policy debates and power struggles. As the government is provisional, there is no constitution or other basis for the rule of law. The structure is autocratic, with all power concentrated in the hands of the supreme leader and his clerical advisors. According to the V-Dem Democracy indices Afghanistan was as of 2023 the 4th least electoral democratic country in the world.

The government of Afghanistan, officially called the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, is the central government of Afghanistan, a unitary state. Under the leadership of the Taliban, the government is a theocracy and an emirate with political power concentrated in the hands of a supreme leader and his clerical advisors, collectively referred to as the Leadership. The Leadership makes all major policy decisions behind closed doors, which are then implemented by the country's civil service and judiciary. As Afghanistan is an Islamic state, governance is based on Sharia law and Pashtunwali, which the Taliban enforces strictly through extensive social and cultural policy.

References

  1. Rahimi, Haroun. "Afghanistan." Yearbook of Islamic and Middle Eastern Law Online 22.1 (2023): 127-138.
  2. Nelson, Matthew (2021). "Taliban Law: Theory and Practice". Melbourne Asia Review.
  3. Jackson, Ashley, and Florian Weigand. "Rebel rule of law." (2020).
  4. 1 2 Khan, Hamid M. (March 2015). Islamic Law, Customary Law, and Afghan Informal Justice. Washington, D.C.: United States Institute of Peace. Retrieved 31 May 2015.
  5. Sial, Omar (December 2006). "Islamic Republic of Afghanistan Legal System and Research". New York University School of Law. Retrieved 2 December 2022.
  6. Rahimi, Haroun (2022). "Afghanistan's laws and legal institutions under the Taliban". Melbourne Asia review.