On 17 May 2018 Dr Gianluca Parolin, Associate Professor at AKU-ISMC, is taking part in the conference “History of Modern Islamic Law: New Directions in the History of Modern Islamic Law”, organised by the Institute for the Study of Islam and Muslim World Societies (IISMM) in France.
Dr Parolin is presenting a paper on “The Vertigo Effect of an Empty Shell: Muwāṭāna from Woe to Fetish”:
The history of modern Islamic law is usually narrated along the lines of its displacement from the centre of the legal system (from the marginalisation of qadi jurisdictions onwards), or those of its reform devices (from the rejuvenation of Imperial fiqh theories downwards). The creeping hegemonic effects of the new Hartian paradigm on the modern articulations of Islamic law are often simply alluded to, and the allusions tend to be confined to legal hermeneutics. Yet, there are a few cases of contemporary Islamic law plainly appropriating elements of the Hartian paradigm—this is the case of muwāṭana (citizenship).
The paper follows how attitudes towards the concept changed since the early 20th century, from a principled rejection all the way to its full appropriation. In the process, the paper will focus on how the hegemonic consensus on what muwāṭana means was constructed, i.e. how its scope was significantly narrowed and mutilated. Looking into muwāṭana’s (now empty) shell, the paper explores the anxiety of Islamic law scholars looking into the abyss as they face the challenge of substantiating muwāṭana while staying true to their dogmas.
For more information about the conference, click
here.
On 17 May 2018 Dr Gianluca Parolin, Associate Professor at AKU-ISMC, is taking part in the conference “History of Modern Islamic Law: New Directions in the History of Modern Islamic Law”, organised by the Institute for the Study of Islam and Muslim World Societies (IISMM) in France.
Dr Parolin is presenting a paper on “The Vertigo Effect of an Empty Shell: Muwāṭāna from Woe to Fetish”:
The history of modern Islamic law is usually narrated along the lines of its displacement from the centre of the legal system (from the marginalisation of qadi jurisdictions onwards), or those of its reform devices (from the rejuvenation of Imperial fiqh theories downwards). The creeping hegemonic effects of the new Hartian paradigm on the modern articulations of Islamic law are often simply alluded to, and the allusions tend to be confined to legal hermeneutics. Yet, there are a few cases of contemporary Islamic law plainly appropriating elements of the Hartian paradigm—this is the case of muwāṭana (citizenship).
The paper follows how attitudes towards the concept changed since the early 20th century, from a principled rejection all the way to its full appropriation. In the process, the paper will focus on how the hegemonic consensus on what muwāṭana means was constructed, i.e. how its scope was significantly narrowed and mutilated. Looking into muwāṭana’s (now empty) shell, the paper explores the anxiety of Islamic law scholars looking into the abyss as they face the challenge of substantiating muwāṭana while staying true to their dogmas.
For more information about the conference, click
here.