Comparative Study: Common Law and Sharia

Last Updated on June 26, 2024

Introduction

Common law and Sharia are foundational legal systems, each shaped by distinct origins, principles, and cultural contexts. Common law, originating from English legal traditions, emphasizes the role of judicial precedents and statutes in shaping legal decisions and norms.

It evolved over centuries through court decisions and legislative enactments, emphasizing stability and consistency in legal interpretations.

In contrast, Sharia law derives from Islamic teachings and principles, encompassing a comprehensive framework that governs both personal conduct and societal norms.

It is rooted in the Quran, Hadith (sayings of Prophet Muhammad), and scholarly interpretations, focusing on ethical behavior, justice, and social welfare.

Sharia covers diverse aspects of life, including family law, inheritance, contracts, and criminal justice, guided by Islamic jurisprudence. Understanding the differences between common law and Sharia is essential for legal practitioners, policymakers, and academics.

It provides insights into how legal systems function within different cultural and religious frameworks, fostering mutual understanding and respect. This comparative study enhances global legal literacy

Historical Background

Understanding the historical origins of common law and Sharia provides insights into their development and distinct characteristics.

Origins of Common Law in England

Common law traces its origins to medieval England, evolving from customary laws and royal decrees. It emerged as a unified legal system under King Henry II in the 12th century.

Common law relies heavily on judicial precedents set by courts, which gradually formed a body of legal principles known as the common law. This system prioritizes the interpretation of statutes and past judicial decisions to guide present legal rulings.

Over time, it expanded through British colonialism, influencing legal systems globally.

Origins of Sharia in Islamic Law

Sharia, in contrast, finds its roots in Islamic teachings and the Quran, considered the divine revelation to Prophet Muhammad. It encompasses laws derived from the Quran, Hadith (sayings of the Prophet), and ijma (consensus of scholars).

Sharia addresses all aspects of life, including personal conduct, family relations, commerce, and governance. Its development began in early Islamic societies, evolving through interpretations by jurists and scholars over centuries.

The principles of Sharia emphasize justice, fairness, and adherence to Islamic ethical standards.

Influence of Religion and Culture

Religion and culture profoundly influenced the development of both legal systems. Common law emerged in a predominantly Christian society, where religious doctrines and customs shaped legal norms and moral principles.

The Christian concept of justice and morality significantly influenced the evolution of common law, reflecting values such as fairness, equity, and individual rights. In contrast, Sharia developed within Islamic societies, where Islamic principles govern both spiritual and temporal aspects of life.

The integration of religious teachings with legal principles in Sharia underscores its holistic approach to justice and governance. Islamic values such as compassion, social welfare, and community solidarity are embedded in Sharia, shaping its legal doctrines and ethical framework.

The evolution of common law and Sharia reflects their cultural contexts and historical developments.

Common law spread globally through British colonization, influencing legal systems in former colonies and countries with Anglo-American legal traditions.

Its emphasis on precedent and judicial reasoning has shaped legal thinking worldwide, contributing to legal uniformity in some areas while allowing for adaptation to local customs and practices.

Sharia’s influence extended across regions where Islam spread, integrating with local customs and traditions to form diverse legal systems. Its principles continue to guide legal frameworks in Muslim-majority countries, adapting to modern challenges while maintaining core Islamic values.

Read: How to Draft Legal Documents in Nigeria

Principles and Application of Common Law

Common Law is a legal system that originated in England and is based on judicial decisions rather than legislative statutes.

Adversarial system

One of the key principles of Common Law is the adversarial system, where two parties present their cases before a neutral third party, usually a judge or jury.

This system allows for a fair and impartial hearing, as both sides have the opportunity to present evidence, call witnesses, and cross-examine the opposing party.

Precedents and case law

Another essential aspect of Common Law is the reliance on precedents and case law.

Precedents are previous court decisions that serve as a guide for future cases, ensuring consistency and predictability in the legal system.

Judges are bound to follow precedent, which helps in establishing principles that can be applied to similar cases in the future.

Concept of “innocent until proven guilty”

In Common Law, the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” is fundamental to the criminal justice system.

This principle places the burden of proof on the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

It ensures that individuals are presumed innocent unless proven otherwise, emphasizing the protection of individual rights and freedoms.

Common Law’s principles and application provide a robust framework for resolving disputes and upholding justice.

Read: E-commerce Law and Regulations in Nigeria

Principles and Application of Sharia

Sharia law is based on principles and application that differ from common law systems.

Inquisitorial system

• Sharia law follows an inquisitorial system where the judge plays an active role in investigating and determining the truth.
  
  
• In this system, the judge gathers evidence, questions witnesses, and seeks guidance from Islamic jurisprudence.
  
  
• This is different from the adversarial system of common law where parties present evidence and arguments to the judge.

Importance of Islamic jurisprudence

• Islamic jurisprudence, also known as fiqh, provides the legal framework for interpreting Sharia law.
  
  
• Islamic scholars study the Quran, Hadith, and other sources to derive principles that guide legal reasoning.
  
  
• Fiqh ensures consistency in applying Sharia law and helps judges make decisions based on Islamic teachings.

Focus on morality and ethics

• Sharia law emphasizes ethical conduct and moral behavior in all aspects of life.
  
  
• Judges consider not only legal implications but also the moral consequences of their decisions.
  
  
• Sharia aims to promote justice, compassion, and righteousness in society through its legal principles.

Read: Legal Ethics and Corruption in Nigeria

Differences in Criminal Law

Punishments and penalties

In Common Law systems, punishments and penalties are often based on the severity of the crime committed. The severity of the crime is determined by the judicial system, and can range from fines to imprisonment.

In Sharia law, punishments are based on Islamic principles and can include physical forms of punishment such as flogging or amputation. The goal of these punishments is to deter individuals from committing crimes and to uphold the principles of justice in Islam.

Role of witnesses and confessions

The role of witnesses and confessions also differs between Common Law and Sharia law. In Common Law, witnesses play a crucial role in providing evidence to prove guilt or innocence in a case. Confessions can also be used as evidence in court proceedings.

In Sharia law, witnesses are required to establish guilt in cases of serious crimes such as adultery or theft. Confessions are also considered as valid evidence, but they must be made voluntarily and without any form of coercion.

Treatment of women and minorities

The treatment of women and minorities is another area where Common Law and Sharia law diverge. In Common Law, women and minorities are afforded equal rights and protections under the law.

The law prohibits discrimination based on gender or race. It ensures equal treatment for individuals, regardless of their background.

In contrast, some view Sharia law as more restrictive towards women and minorities. It applies certain punishments and restrictions differently based on gender or minority status.

However, it is important to note that interpretations of Sharia law can vary among different Islamic societies.

Overall, the differences in criminal law between Common Law and Sharia law highlight the diverse approaches to justice and punishment in different legal systems. Understanding these distinctions can provide valuable insights into the principles and values that underpin each system.

Read: Property Rights and Inheritance Law in Nigeria

Civil Law and Family Law

Contracts and property rights

• Common Law: Contracts are based on the principle of offer, acceptance, and consideration.
  
  
• Sharia: Contracts are governed by Islamic principles, including the prohibition of interest.
  
  
• Common Law: Property rights are protected through the enforcement of legal documents.
  
  
• Sharia: Property rights are overseen by Islamic guidelines regarding ownership and usage.

Marriage and divorce

• Common Law: Marriage is recognized as a legal union between two individuals.
  
  
• Sharia: Marriage is a sacred bond guided by Islamic teachings and customs.
  
  
• Common Law: Divorce proceedings follow legal procedures determined by the court.
  
  
• Sharia: Divorce is permitted under specific circumstances outlined in Islamic law.

Inheritance and succession

• Common Law: Inheritance laws are based on the deceased individual’s will or intestacy laws.
  
  
• Sharia: Inheritance is dictated by specific rules outlined in the Quran and Hadith.
  
  
• Common Law: Succession is determined by the legal system and the deceased’s wishes.
  
  
• Sharia: Succession follows Islamic guidelines, taking into account kinship and gender roles.

Experiences in Nigeria

In Nigeria, the coexistence of common law and Sharia legal systems has led to a unique legal landscape.

Coexistence of Common Law and Sharia

• The northern states in Nigeria predominantly apply Sharia law.
  
  
• Meanwhile, the southern states largely follow common law principles.
  
  
• This divide has created a complex legal framework in the country.

Challenges and Controversies

• One of the main challenges is the clash of legal ideologies.
  
  
• Disputes often arise when cases involve individuals from different legal backgrounds.
  
  
• There are concerns about the unequal treatment of citizens under the two systems.

Efforts to Harmonize the Two Legal Systems

• Several initiatives have been undertaken to promote harmony between common law and Sharia.
  
  
• Judges have received training on how to apply both legal systems effectively.
  
  
• Legal experts have worked on developing a unified legal framework that respects both traditions.

Therefore, the coexistence of common law and Sharia in Nigeria presents both challenges and opportunities for legal practitioners and policymakers.

Conclusion

Common law and Sharia represent two fundamentally different legal systems with distinct origins, principles, and applications. Common law, developed in England, relies heavily on judicial precedents and statutory laws.

It emphasizes the role of judges in interpreting the law and making decisions based on previous cases, ensuring consistency and predictability in legal outcomes.

This system is flexible, allowing for the evolution of legal principles through judicial decisions and legislative changes.

Islamic teachings and principles deeply root Sharia. The Quran and Hadith primarily derive Sharia, complemented by scholarly interpretations and consensus.

Key Differences

The key differences between common law and Sharia lie in their foundational principles and applications.

Common law focuses on secular legal principles and the role of precedent in shaping the law.

It allows for the gradual development of legal norms through judicial decisions, providing flexibility and adaptability in changing social contexts.

This system is characterized by its case-by-case approach, where judges interpret the law in light of previous rulings, ensuring consistency and fairness.