When Western Law Clashes with Sharia Law

 

When Western Law Clashes with Sharia Law

Introduction

As a Muslim trying to stay neutral, I often wonder: why does the word Sharia always become a boogeyman in Europe or America whenever Islam is debated? For me, this signals a deeper clash not just about law, but about worldviews. (Esposito, Islam and the West, 1999)

---

A Definition Often Misunderstood

We must admit, many Westerners understand Sharia only through one lens: hand-cutting, flogging, stoning. Yet, Sharia literally means the way to the water source in other words, a broad life guide. (Kamali, Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence, 1991)

In my view, the problem is Sharia is reduced to its penal aspects. In reality, Sharia also regulates business ethics, family law, and child protection (though this too is debated). So when secular Western law meets Sharia, conflict often arises from narrow interpretation.

---

Where the Clash Begins

Many Western scholars say this clash stems from different roots. Western law, especially in Europe, grew from Roman law, then evolved with Renaissance and secular ideals. Sharia, by contrast, is rooted in the Quran, Hadith, consensus (ijma’), and analogy (qiyas). (Hallaq, Shari'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations, 2009)

I see the problem here. Secularism upholds separation of religion and state, but Sharia rejects that separation. That’s why, in many modern Muslim countries, Sharia and civil law often coexist sometimes harmoniously, sometimes with tension.

---

Stories from the UK and France

The clearest example is the UK. There, some Muslim communities use Sharia Councils to settle family, marriage, divorce, and inheritance issues. De facto, this is accepted. But legally, it sparks debate. (Bano, Muslim Women and Shari'ah Councils, 2012)

France is different. The country enforces laïcité strict secularism. Religious symbols in public spaces are banned; hijabs in public schools are forbidden. To me, this shows how Western law sometimes collides with basic Sharia principles like the freedom to practice religion. (Bowen, Why the French Don’t Like Headscarves, 2007)

---

The Big Question: Which Should Prevail?

Personally, I stay neutral. On one hand, I understand Western fears that Sharia might ‘erode’ liberal democracy, especially individual freedoms. On the other hand, I understand Muslims feel they have the right to practice their religious laws. This is not an easy dilemma. (An-Na'im, Islam and the Secular State, 2008)

The clash gets sharper on gender or human rights issues. Many Western activists highlight Sharia’s stances on women’s rights, inheritance, or polygamy. Here, debates often stall because both sides stand on different logical grounds.

---

How Muslim Countries Handle It

If we look at the Middle East, countries have varied approaches. Saudi Arabia and Iran implement Sharia as state law. But Turkey, since Ataturk, has separated Sharia from civil law. Indonesia uses national law with touches of Sharia in some provinces. (Peletz, Islam and the Cultural Politics of Legitimacy, 2011)

As an Indonesian Muslim, I see my country’s compromise as unique. The Marriage Law, for example, regulates family matters for Muslims according to Sharia but within the national legal framework. This shows Sharia and Western law can meet halfway.

---

Can This Clash Be Resolved?

I often wonder if these two legal systems can coexist peacefully. The answer: yes, but it requires mutual understanding. Western law must see Sharia beyond physical punishments. Muslims must also honestly admit that Sharia needs fresh ijtihad for the modern context. (Ramadan, Radical Reform, 2009)

For me, real solutions come through dialogue. In many Muslim communities in the West, Sharia family law operates within national law. Conflict only arises when both sides negate each other.

---

Challenges in the Global Era

In today’s global era, this clash is more complex. Migration, dual citizenship, and international law often bring Sharia into contact with Western courts. Take the Shamima Begum case in the UK a woman who went to Syria and lost her citizenship. Here, Western law and Sharia collide on human rights and loyalty. (BBC, 2021)

For me, the biggest challenge is ensuring Sharia is not marginalized but also not misused as a radical political tool.

---

Closing: The Middle Ground Exists

As a writer, I want to remain neutral. I believe this clash should not fuel Islamophobia or endless suspicion. Sharia is not a monster to be feared. Western law is not always absolutely right either. What’s needed is mutual understanding of historical roots, cultural contexts, and each system’s legal aims.

If Sharia is seen as a code of ethics, not just criminal law, it can coexist with Western law. And if Western law truly guarantees religious freedom, Muslims will have space to practice Sharia too.

In the end, I believe this clash does not have to mean perpetual conflict. Beneath the law, humans still need a sense of justice

something both Sharia and Western law ultimately pursue.