<![CDATA[This article examines the relationship between classical Islamic dhimmi regulations and contemporary international human rights standards concerning the rights of non-Muslim minorities. Focusing on religious freedom and political participation, the study adopts a comparative and disaggregated analytical approach to assess areas of convergence and divergence between the two legal frameworks. The analysis demonstrates that both classical Islamic law and international human rights law recognize the protection of religious minorities and support freedom of worship, indicating a degree of normative compatibility. However, significant differences emerge in the domain of political participation. While the dhimmi framework historically operated within a hierarchical model that limited access of non-Muslims to positions of ultimate political authority, international human rights law is grounded in equal citizenship, non-discrimination, and inclusive participation. This divergence reflects distinct legal philosophies concerning sovereignty, citizenship, and the relationship between religion and political power. The findings suggest that classical dhimmi regulations are partially compatible with contemporary minority rights standards, particularly in matters of religious freedom, but remain in tension with modern expectations of equal political participation. By distinguishing between normative convergence and structural divergence, this study contributes to ongoing debates on minority rights, legal pluralism, and governance in contemporary Muslim-majority societies.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
