The fundamental distinction made in Shiite legal epistemology is that between qaṭʿ (certainty) and ẓann (conjecture). Contemporary Uṣūlī epistemology maintains that in the juristic process of the derivation of Sharīʿa precepts, a mujtahid is prohibited to use any evidence that gives rise to mere ẓann. Rather, he must only use evidence that gives qaṭʿ of Sharīʿa precepts. Furthermore, this discourse distinctly argues that a mujtahid can also derive knowledge of Sharīʿa precepts through the ẓann al-khāṣ (especial conjecture) that is emanated from evidence that is ẓannī (conjectural) by nature but is substantiated by the Divine Lawgiver Himself through other qaṭʿī (certainty bearing) evidence. This understanding effectively curtails the derivation of Sharīʿa precepts to only the textual evidence of the Qurʾān and sunna, and in the present day this textualist dependency can be criticised for contributing towards the gulf that exists between traditional Shiite jurisprudence and matters that are pertinent to contemporary societies. In light of this, this study critically analyses the contemporary discourse of Uṣūlī epistemology and explores whether it has the potential to legitimise the epistemic validity and utility of a wider range of evidence in the juristic process of deriving Sharīʿa precepts. It essentially focuses on the strength and rigour of the epistemological underpinnings that are maintained in Uṣūlī legal theory, and by highlighting that these underpinnings and the underlying epistemic assumptions that are prevalent in contemporary Uṣūlī legal epistemology are rationally derived, this study explains how and why the Uṣūlīs have been led to rationally give preference to textual evidence over nontextual evidence. This study concludes that Uṣūlī legal theory has the potential to, and moreover is required to, undergo an epistemological paradigm shift that permits the acceptance of the epistemic validity of a wider range of evidence, other than just those that emanate qaṭʿ or ẓann al-khāṣ.

Creative Shari‘ah compliance can be defined as compliance with the letter but not the objectives of Shari‘ah. In recent years, Islamic finance industry practises have come under scrutiny, with strong critiques levelled against many institutions that claim to provide Shari‘ah-compliant Islamic financial products and services, while such products and services in fact undermine the spirit and the objectives of Shari‘ah. Financial instruments based on the profit- and loss-sharing model are deemed by Shari‘ah scholars and Muslim academics to be the most compliant with the objectives of Islamic law. Nonetheless, research has shown that they are the least practised forms of Islamic finance; in contrast, institutions offering Islamic financial services (IIFS) offer mainly debt-based instruments. While many researchers have noted this gap between the theory and practise of Islamic finance, no study has provided a sustained analysis of the issue. This thesis undertakes such analysis and, in doing so, significantly contributes to the sphere of Islamic finance in three main ways. First, it critically appraises justifications of creative Shari‘ah compliance practises. Second, it examines how Shari‘ah supervisory board )SSB) governance practises and the inconsistent fatwas (Islamic legal opinions) issued by SSBs contribute to the issue of creative Shari‘ah compliance in contemporary Islamic finance. Most importantly, it suggests regulatory mechanisms which regulators can employ in Islamic countries such as Saudi Arabia and in secular countries such as the United Kingdom to deal with the issue of creative Shari‘ah compliance. This thesis concludes that creative Shari‘ah compliance is not a phenomenon new to Islamic law, but it is one that has no solid justification in Islamic jurisprudence. This study suggests two public mechanisms to remedy the issue of creative Shari‘ah compliance: establishing central Shari‘ah supervisory boards and enforcing compulsory disclosure. In addition, it proposes private mechanisms to remedy creative Shari‘ah compliance which can be employed without governmental involvement. These mechanisms include adopting a Shari‘ah compliance rating, Shari‘ah indices, private Shari‘ah auditing, international standards related to enhancing Shari‘ah compliance, and a whistle-blowing policy for serious Shari‘ah compliance violations, as well as characterising an IIFS in its articles of association as an entity that fully complies with Shari‘ah ruling. These remedies are particularly useful when an IIFS is operating within a jurisdiction where regulators cannot or prefer not to be involved in regulating Shari‘ah governance.

This study was conducted in Iran (Tehran) to assess perceptions of women with regard to access to justice. Its aims are firstly to provide original evidence about user perceptions of access to justice, and to contribute to related national/international debates and body of literature. The research reviews some of the literature in the field of access to justice to highlight similarities and gaps between contextual framework of Islamic and Western correlated legal concepts including definitional analysis in support of and/ or against access to justice model worldwide. Consideration was also given to a comparative framework for conceptualizing access to justice from Islamic Law perspectives. The research evaluates the historical development of access to justice in the Islamic Republic of Iran as a case study together with an analysis of barriers. The research also presents the findings of a survey study on women' perceptions (first study of its kind) in Iran conducted as a significant constituent of the thesis. The thesis concludes that existing Western models have excessively highlighted the need to strengthen state's institutions to provide 'access' to mechanisms of 'justice'. Access to justice as a complex phenomenon, however, incorporates various conceptions of 'justice' as an index for 'access' on one side and individuals as 'users of justice' on the other side. A distinctive conclusion is that 'legal empowerment' can provide wider 'access to justice' in Iran particularly for disadvantaged groups such as women.

The operationalization of Islamic criminal system by some Muslim jurisdictions in the post-colonial era raises many human rights questions. On the one hand, the system is perceived as inhuman, cruel and degrading, and on the other, as gender discriminatory and iniquitous. This thesis focuses on the second part of this critique. Discrimination on ground of gender in Muslim states has been one of the major human right issues that engage scholars in heated debates on whether or not gender justice exists under the Islamic criminal regime. In relation to the offences of homicide and bodily hurt, discriminatory principles are often justified on economic argument. Interestingly, these principles are characterised as divinely ordained, thus unchangeable to eternity. However, the interplay between the divine and the human elements in the development of the regime is mostly ignored and it is often difficult to ascertain from where such principles emanate. This thesis examines the classical theorization, the Sharīʿah-inspired penal codes of Pakistan and the 12 Northern states of Nigeria, as well as case law, with a view to ascertaining whether the so-called gender justice deficit is intrinsic to the divine or is mere human construction. The findings of the thesis reveal existence of an egalitarian tone in the divine. The divine however has left considerable room for human agency to employ construction that best suits its circumstances. This enabled the classical jurists to differ on many issues that raise gender concerns in the modern world. Biological determinism plays a significant role in the construction of the divine. What appears to influence the jurists include cross-contextual analogy by creating linkages between unrelated themes and infiltration of customary practices. The thesis posits that the problem of gender justice under the regime can best be addressed from within the system. This is possible when contemporary Islamic scholarship engages in thorough intellectual analysis of the classical fiqh literature. This is likely to appeal to Muslims in whose territories the law operates. The thesis therefore suggests participation of all stakeholders, including women, in criminal policy formulation. This would entail employing affirmative action measures that would guarantee participation of women in both legislative and judicial process.

This thesis argues that the Islamic finance industry has its ideological foundations in the business ethics and stakeholder theory since the Islamic jurisprudence supports the ethical foundation of business and financial intermediations. These ethical practices can be traced back to jurisprudential concepts of Maqasid Al Sharia and Maslaha in Islamic law. The current practices of IFI however fails to follow the ethically sound (and in line with the Maqasid and Maslaha ideals) stakeholder model because of competitive pressures from the conventional financial industry and is thus modelled more on the Neo liberal shareholder profit maximisation ideology, focusing mainly on ensuring that the shareholders and certain investments account holders get maximum returns, thereby foregoing the interest of other stakeholders. It is thus argued that due to the incompatibility of the Neo liberal ethos with the Islamic finance ideals (the Maqasid of Financial intermediation), the Islamic finance industry needs to focus on more stakeholder oriented practices. The major reason for the failure of the current regulatory framework for the Islamic finance industry is the lack of any compliance and enforcement mechanism to ensure that uniform sharia governance mechanisms can be applied across the jurisdictions. This it is argued can best be achieved by international principle based Meta regulatory framework focusing on the stakeholder nature of the Islamic finance involving the IFSB and the AAOIFI and giving these bodies the authority to issue certificates of sharia compliance whereby the IFI’s would be required to obtain these certificates to function as ‘Islamic’ institutions.

This cross disciplinary socio-legal research study provides a unique contribution to the study of British Muslims, faith based ADR mechanisms and the state. The existence of informal religio-centric dispute resolution forums exemplifies a form of legal pluralism in action. The study investigated the approach to Islamic family law and dispute resolution of a sample of 250 British Muslims aged 18-45, primarily Britishborn, university educated and practicing their faith or understanding their religious obligations. Empirical research was undertaken using both quantitative and qualitative research methods, and conclusions were drawn by assessing the findings using Grounded Theory methodology. Empirical research focussing on younger generations of British Muslims and the transformative processes of the Islamic legal traditions impacting on the application of religious laws are absent. The present study is unique in a number of regards, with a focus on the subject group’s interaction with, and perception of, dispute resolution forums available for resolving Islamic family law disputes. This thesis argues that British Muslims from within the socio-demographic profile of the subject group: 1) believe faith based ADR mechanisms such as Shariah Councils are necessary for providing expertise on Islamic family law issues, however in their present form they are imperfect; 2) believe Shariah Councils are more competent than national courts in dealing with Islamic law issues; 3) have plural approaches to negotiating law, culture and religion; and 4) believe there should not be a separate legal system for Muslims in Britain, as this is separatist and divergent from their identities as ‘British Muslims’ which is an evolving self-identification. Participants displayed numerous perceptions about the manner and form of interaction between British Muslims, faith based ADR mechanisms and the British legal system. Six categories are coined in the research findings exploring these opinions, the most popular being a ‘rights-based evaluation promoting Interlegality’ and ‘necessity for validation of religious beliefs’.

This thesis is a comparative study of the role of the accused in the systems of English and Islamic criminal justice. It seeks to explore the underlying relationship between the individual and the state through an historical, structural and contextual analysis of their rules relating to questioning and of confessions. The analysis of the English system covers the period 1800 to 1984, with particular reference to developments during the nineteenth century when the foundations for the modern English state were established. The analysis of the Islamic system combines traditionally Islamic and modern methods, assessing the "Islamisation" movement in Malaysia through a religico-structural understanding of juristic opinion from the four main schools of Sunnite jurisprudence. The thesis contributes to existing knowledge on a number of levels: first, it questions and revises the "myth" of "progress" that has dominated observations of the history of the English criminal justice system; second, it elucidates the relationship between Islamic law in theory and the law that is applied and proposed in its name in Muslim states; third, it provides an analytical framework for drawing comparisons between the underlying values of the systems of English and Islamic criminal justice. While acknowledging fundamental differences in terms of outlook and articulation, the author concludes there are important similarities expressed through such notions as "suspect" in the English system and "kafir"I"fasiq" in the Islamic. These act as intermediate constitutional categories to whom the state owe less protection. But the author notes also that these similarities are not observed necessarily in the "law" which is implemented or proposed in Muslim states; exact correspondence depends upon the over-arching political structure and the institution of Caliphate. The thesis is divided into six chapters: chapter one sets out the conventional view of the historical development of English criminal procedure and evidence; chapter two subjects that to a critique and chapter three offers a revised thesis. Chapter four, explores methods for interpreting and explaining Islam; chapter five sets out rules relating to confessions and questioning according to the four Sunni schools; chapter six puts them into "context" through an examination of the "Islamisation" process in Malaysia.

This thesis is a comparative study of the pre-trial procedures of England and Wales and Saudi Arabia. Its aim is to show how the pre-trial procedures of Saudi Arabia could be re-designed in order to conform to both the standards set by international human rights and the norms of Shari'ah law and argues that there is much common ground between the two. It addresses the human rights relevant to pre-trial procedures and explores in-depth how these are expressed in international human rights legislation and in the current legislation of England and Wales with particular reference to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984). They are contrasted with the relevant articles of the Code of Criminal Procedure 2001 (CCP) of Saudi Arabia. Individual rights such as the right to liberty, the right silence, the right to privacy, the right to bail and the right to an effective remedy are examined in depth and relevant case law is cited throughout. The history of pre-trial procedures and regulations in England and Wales and Saudi Arabia is explored in order to understand how these have developed into what exists today. The former is traced from the Norman period to the present day and the latter from the pre-Islamic era of the Arabian Peninsula. The actual practice of these procedures is explored comparatively through a fieldwork project involving semi-structured interviews with police officers and lawyers in England and police officers, police officers, prosecutors and lawyers in Saudi Arabia. The thesis ends with a thorough examination of how pre-trial procedures in Saudi Arabia could be regulated and monitored so as to bring them in line with the standards required by international human rights legislation and international practice and with the demands of Islamic law.

There is a legal separation in Jordan between Sharia' (Islamic) Law and Civil Law. Both types of law come together to create criminal law that has a negative effect on women's rights. Laws in Jordan are evolving in the right direction but are not going far enough to protect women from violence. This study explores the issues of violence against women in Jordan through a study the Jordanian legal system and the experience of women who suffer violence. The working of the Jordanian justice system is presented by analysing the responses of state and non-state institutions dealing with violence against women. Included in the research is an analysis of feminist concerns with the law and the position of women in society. My concern is with the way in which women's inferior position impacts on their experience of violence and their ability to obtain redress and access protection. The methods used to complete this study included qualitative data collections such as field observations, and semi-structured participant interviews. It also extended to archival work in which I studied official reports and public policies on VAW. My study attempts to explain the structure of gender relations and women's experiences of violence in the context of Jordanian society by using feminist theory. The empirical work conducted in Jordan considered the effectiveness of law in serving victims. Further analysis considers how the Jordanian socio-economic and legal environment influences women's decisions on whether to seek help. The research found that there is a need to introduce better-developed law accompanied by additional policy measures to affect an essential change in attitudes. This requires changing some laws and policy programmes to increase awareness of legal rights. Additionally, I will suggest that applying Islamic law to women's rights can also give women more freedom and provide them with additional opportunities to access protection. The research identified a need for coherence between Civil and Sharia' (Islamic) Law in developing civil and criminal remedies which would align Jordan's domestic law to its international obligations.