This thesis is about finding out if there is a possibility to consider reconciliation between Islam a minority religion and European law in regards to human rights.The aim is to understand the conflict between Islam and liberal political concept human rights law to present a picture that can show human rights protection in European society of which Muslims have become an essential part. Sharia law is taken as an Islamic legal and political manifestation that considered being in conflict with contemporary liberal political concepts like European Union and its laws.
With the help of comparative analysis of Islamic countries both in a non European country and a country that is a party to European convention, and historical practices of Muslim societies and regimes in relation to value of Sharia in Islamic civilizations and contemporary world. It was observed that Sharia has never been the primary source of legal and political fabric of Islamic rules throughout the history and a larger part of Islamic morals and values recognize modern liberal political concepts and values such as constitutionalism and human rights which are also practiced in modern Muslim majority states like Turkey.
John Rawls’ theory of overlapping consensus is used in support which says that a desired consensus is only possible if a concept affirms a political conception that is sufficient to express values under favorable conditions make a just constitutional regime despite other values may oppose them.
Table of Content
Chapter 1
Introduction
Research problem
Aim and Research Questions
Delimitation
Relevance to the Human Rights
Material
Theory
Method
Chapter 2
Universal European Human Rights and their Relationship with Islam
EU Human Rights Models
Political Discourse of Human Rights
Chapter 3
Political Compatibility between Islam and Human Rights as Liberal Political Concept
Sharia through the Course of Time
Sharia the Islamic Law
Sharia Understanding towards Becoming a State Law
Concept of Secular State and Islam
Comparison of Pakistan and Turkey In Relation to Sharia Law and Human Rights
Islamic Republic of Pakistan
Republic of Turkey
Analysis
Conclusion
Bibliography
Research Objectives & Key Themes
The research examines the possibility of reconciling Islamic doctrine and European human rights standards by investigating the conflict between traditional Sharia-based political frameworks and liberal democratic values through a comparative analysis of Muslim-majority states.
- Reconciliation of Islam and modern liberal human rights frameworks
- Application of John Rawls’ "overlapping consensus" theory to religious pluralism
- Comparative case study of state-religion relations in Pakistan and Turkey
- Analysis of the historical and political role of Sharia within Muslim societies
- Critique of extremist interpretations versus secular governance models
Excerpt from the Book
Introduction
We are living in a world where we have to interact with each other in many capacities, individually and together as a part of a society, with other groups of people whom we can assume a society with difference in their behaviors, associations, and commitments. Going further deep, we can find others different in their beliefs and cultures and sometimes some can say that there are differences so deep that these are considered as clash between civilizations or some see it as between people of faith and rational realities based on evidence. Among these differences, we as humans have fought and evolved in our human morals and ideals through a journey of enlightenment by very harsh historical discourses. Modern day form of society which is a highly achievable fabric of social ingredients like political morals, citizenship, justice, law, constitutional supremacy, democracy, and human rights etc, is a society that has experienced in past divine forms based on so called comprehensive doctrines of creating and managing people. Since three hundred years a series of revolutions in the West, modernity has concluded that a society based on single or group sovereignty against or above all others has never been stable and beneficial at all to serve the basic unit and theme of the society, the human being.
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1: Provides the foundational introduction, defines the research problem regarding the conflict between Islamic doctrines and European human rights, and outlines the methodology and theoretical framework.
Chapter 2: Analyzes the nature of universal human rights within the European context and establishes how these models relate to Islamic perspectives.
Chapter 3: Explores the political compatibility between Islam and liberal concepts, featuring a comparative study of the legal and political environments in Pakistan and Turkey.
Analysis: Synthesizes the findings to evaluate whether a reconciliation between Islamic tradition and modern human rights is achievable under the theory of overlapping consensus.
Conclusion: Summarizes the thesis, asserting that state-imposed religious laws often conflict with human rights and that a secular democratic approach, as seen in Turkey's history, offers a more viable path for pluralistic societies.
Keywords
Islam, Human Rights, Sharia Law, Liberal Political Concepts, Comparative Analysis, Islamic Civilization, Overlapping Consensus, Islamic Dynasties, Constitutionalism, Just Constitutional Regime, Secular State, Political Liberalism, Pluralism.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this research?
The research primarily investigates the compatibility of Islamic political and legal concepts with modern European human rights standards.
What are the central thematic areas?
The key themes include the intersection of state law and religion, the historical evolution of Sharia, the impact of political Islam on minority rights, and the framework of liberal constitutional democracy.
What is the primary research question?
The main question is whether a reconciliation between Islamic doctrine and EU human rights law is possible within a modern, pluralistic society.
Which scientific methodology is employed?
The author uses a qualitative, case-oriented comparative method, analyzing two Muslim-majority nations (Pakistan and Turkey) to test the hypothesis of compatibility.
What is addressed in the main body of the work?
The main body explores the theoretical conflict through John Rawls’ "overlapping consensus," analyzes historical implementations of Sharia, and contrasts the secular governance of Turkey with the Islamized legal system of Pakistan.
What are the characterizing keywords of the study?
The study is characterized by terms such as Sharia Law, Human Rights, Overlapping Consensus, Secular State, Constitutionalism, and Comparative Analysis.
How does the author view the role of the Ottoman Empire in this context?
The author highlights the Tanzimat Reform period of the Ottoman Empire as a historical example of successful efforts to secularize laws rather than imposing rigid, narrow interpretations of religious texts.
Why are Pakistan and Turkey chosen for comparison?
These countries are chosen to represent two different approaches: Turkey as a secular-leaning state attempting to align with European human rights, and Pakistan as a state where Sharia has been integrated into the constitution and legal system.
What is the significance of the "modes vivendi" concept in the study?
The author contrasts a stable, overlapping consensus with a mere "modes vivendi," arguing that stable societies require a more profound agreement than a temporary coexistence based on political bargaining.
- Quote paper
- Ghazanfar Ahmad Adnan (Author), 2018, Religious Rights of Minorities in EU Law. Sharia Law Compatibility with European Human Rights Concepts, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/464725
