<![CDATA[This article examines the position of female judges in Islamic political jurisprudence (fiqh siyasah) and its institutionalisation across Muslim-majority countries. Two central questions guide this study: first, how classical and contemporary Islamic jurisprudence has positioned female judicial authority within the doctrine of wilāyat al-qaḍāʾ; and second, whether the incorporation of female judges into the constitutional frameworks of Muslim-majority states reflects a reconfiguration of the normative foundations of judicial legitimacy. This study employs a normative legal research design combining comparative and conceptual approaches. Primary legal materials consist of classical juristic texts, constitutional provisions, and judicial appointment statutes from selected Muslim-majority jurisdictions. In contrast, secondary legal materials include peer-reviewed scholarship on Islamic constitutionalism, judicial reform, and gender in Islamic legal systems. These materials are analysed through doctrinal interpretation and thematic comparative evaluation. The findings reveal, first, that classical jurisprudence did not produce a binding consensus (ijmaʿ) categorically prohibiting female judges, as minority opinions and divergent methodological approaches demonstrate the tradition’s inherent plurality. Second, the comparative constitutional analysis shows that the majority of Muslim-majority states have formally institutionalised female judges by reframing judicial authority in terms of professional competence, constitutional equality, and institutional legitimacy rather than in terms of gender. This article concludes that these developments reflect a structural transformation in Islamic political jurisprudence: a reconfiguration from a classical configuration premised on the convergence of sovereignty, religious legitimacy, and male guardianship, toward a constitutional paradigm grounded in institutional competence and equality before the law.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
