Search Results

Human Rights in Islamic Jurisprudence: Why Should All Human Beings Be Inviolable?

Recep Şentürk

in The Future of Religious Freedom: Global Challenges

This chapter seeks to recapture the classical tradition of Islamic jurisprudence that recognizes universal human rights irrespective of religious status, gender, place, or time. It shows how the loss ... More

This chapter seeks to recapture the classical tradition of Islamic jurisprudence that recognizes universal human rights irrespective of religious status, gender, place, or time. It shows how the loss of this tradition has resulted in a human rights dependency on the West and a lagging record of religious freedom and democracy in Muslim-majority countries. In contrast to the Shaffi doctrine that accorded civil rights by the state, the ancient Hanafi school emphasized human inviolability—and the innate rights that derive from it—as God-given, universal, and applicable to all societies from the beginning of time. The chapter traces the origins and development of this school of jurisprudence to demonstrate how it reflects the earliest and richest Islamic principles. In developing the doctrine of human inviolability, classic Islamic scholars emphasized axiomatic rights—such as life, freedom of worship, and property—as obligations on political authorities and limits on state power. This fostered a cosmopolitan jurisprudence that contributed to the flourishing of Islam's great civilizations and could aid in its rejuvenation in the modern world.Less

Property Rights in Ancient Rome

Éva Jakab

in Ownership and Exploitation of Land and Natural Resources in the Roman World

In ancient societies, ownership or other types of control over agrarian land played an essential role in the wealth and growth of individuals and of the whole community. Legal institutions interacted ... More

In ancient societies, ownership or other types of control over agrarian land played an essential role in the wealth and growth of individuals and of the whole community. Legal institutions interacted in the allocation of natural resources. Therefore the definition of property rights and other types of interest in land attracted intense scrutiny. In the nineteenth century, legal theory created the myth of absolute, exclusive, and unbounded individual ownership, which seemingly had its roots in classical Roman law. The chapter shows that such ownership was never an abstract, unlimited right in ancient Rome. Ownership was rather a dynamic category with changing legal content according to its social, political, and economic environment. It met a broader target, and fostered conditions amenable to an optimal exploitation of the main natural resource, agrarian land.Less

Autonomy

in Turf Wars: Territory and Citizenship in the Contemporary State

This chapter shows how areas in Colombia that have no understanding of recognition of rights in property use extensive land and resource claims as their basis for self-governance and autonomy. It ... More

This chapter shows how areas in Colombia that have no understanding of recognition of rights in property use extensive land and resource claims as their basis for self-governance and autonomy. It starts with a discussion of the issue of the Salvajina Dam, which flooded specific indigenous areas, causing a local protest. From there the discussion turns to the changes in coffee, gold, and local administration that occurred as a result of the Salvajina Dam. These changes led to a widespread migration to other areas in the country in an effort to look for new jobs. The chapter also shows how the social rights of the peasants came to fruition and how property became constituted as ethnic territories.Less

Revolutionary Time

Joseph P. Reidy

in Illusions of Emancipation: The Pursuit of Freedom and Equality in the Twilight of Slavery

Northerners and Southerners alike often viewed the Civil War as a revolution. For Confederates, secession promised a return to the era of the Founders when, they presumed, property rights in humans ... More

Northerners and Southerners alike often viewed the Civil War as a revolution. For Confederates, secession promised a return to the era of the Founders when, they presumed, property rights in humans were secure. Unionists found ambiguity, not certainty, in the term revolution, eventually offsetting their fears of unrestrained violence with the belief that destroying slavery might entail unleashing revolutionary social change. Everyone, North and South, grappled with understanding the peculiarities of revolutionary time: its ability to accelerate, to slow down or stop, and even to move backward. As the end of the war drew near, the thought that the centuries-old institution of slavery had collapsed in little more than four years required suspending conventional wisdom about the passage of time. But for enslaved persons, those years seemed an eternity during which unknown thousands had perished before freedom arrived. Both privately and publicly, observers North and South pondered the fearsome toll that slavery and its violent destruction exacted upon the nation.Less