A Comparative Study of Maṣlaḥah and Mischief Rule: Pakistani Perspective
Abstract
Abstract Views: 282
At present, almost all the legal systems are concerned with establishing a flexible interpretive policy to make the law to resolve the everyday complex issues for the benefit of the people at large. It is, however, a matter of great concern that the higher courts in Pakistan are still following static and foreign interpretive modes like a literal rule, the golden rule, and mischief rule etc, in the presence of dynamic interpretive principles of Islam. In this context, this research aims to analyze critically, the mischief rule and to present maslahah, a vibrant Islamic interpretive principle. This article argues that the Holy Prophet (SAW), his companions and the traditional Muslim jurists had to decide the contemporary issues by the way of maṣlaḥah which led to the development of Islamic jurisprudence and resulted in the ease of the people. While interpretive rules of English common law are static and have become outdated. This research, thus, concludes that unlike mischief rule, maslaha is more flexible and favorable by Islam for resolving the present-day socio-economic issues of the people. It recommends the higher courts of Pakistan to follow the principle of maṣlaḥah during the process of interpretation. It is also acclaimed that the Renaissance of this vibrant principle of ijtihād would be a revival of the interpretive policy of the Prophet (SAW), his companions and the traditional Muslim jurists. It would also lead to the development of Islamic jurisprudence in the light of changed context.
Keywords: Maṣlaḥah, Mischief rule, Judicial policy, Pakistani context, Conclusions and recommendations
Downloads
References
Abd al-Qᾱdir, Ibn Badrᾱn. Al-Madkhal Ilᾱ Madhhab Imᾱm Aḥmad. Miṣr: Idᾱrah Ṭaba῾al-Munῑriyyah, 1959.
Abū ῾Abd Allᾱh Muḥammad bin Abῑ Bakr. Ibn Qayyim, I῾lᾱm al-Mawaqqi῾ῑn ῾an Rabb al-῾Ᾱlamῑn. edited by Muḥayy al-Dῑn, 4 vol. Miṣr: Matba῾ah al-Sa῾ᾱdah, 1975.
Ahmad bin῾Alῑ al-Rᾱzῑ, Abū Bakr, al-Jassas, Ahkᾱmal-Qur᾿ᾱn. Egypt: Matba῾h al-Bahῑ῾h al-Misriyyah, 1357 A.H.
Alῑ bin Muḥammad bin al-Husayn, al-Bazdawi, Uṣūl al-Bazdawῑ: Sharah Kashf al-Asrᾱr lil ‘Abd al ‘Aziz al-Bukhᾱrῑ. Misr: Taba’ Maktab al-Sanai’, 1322 A.H.
al-Ᾱmidῑ, Sayf al-Din, Abu al-Husayn. Al-Ahkᾱm fῑ Uṣūl al-Ahkᾱm. Cairo: Mu’assisat al- Ḥalbi, 1987.
—. Al-Ahkᾱm fῑ Uṣūl al-Ahkᾱm. Egypt: Mu’assisat al- Ḥalbi, 1988.
Barak, S. A., Haron. Purposive Interpretation in Law. Delhi: Universal Law Publishers, 2007.
Al-Bazdawῑ, ῾Alῑ bin Muḥammad bin al-Husayn. Uṣūl al-Bazdawῑ: Sharah Kashf al-Asrᾱr lil ‘Abd al ‘Aziz al-Bukhᾱrῑ. Misr: Taba’ Maktab al-Sanai,’ 1307 A.H.
Benion, Francis. Statutory Interpretation. Sydney: Butterworth and Co. Ltd, 1984.
Al-Biḥᾱrῑ, Muḥib Allᾱh bin ῾Abd Shukūr. Fawᾱtih al-Rahmūt Sharah Musallam al-Thabūt. Miṣr: Al-Matba῾ Al-Amῑriyyah Bulᾱq, 1322 A. H.
Brain, Leiter. Objectivity in Law and Morality. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
al-Buṭiy, Ramaḍan. Ḍawabiṭ al-Maṣlaḥah. Cairo: Muṣṭafᾱ Bᾱbῑ al-Ḥalabῑ, 1998.
Caenegem, R. C Van. The Birth of English Common Law. London: Cambridge University Press, 1973.
Cownie F., and A. Bradeny. The English Legal System in Context. London: Lexis Nexis Butterworths, 2003.
Edgar, S. G. G., Craies on Statute Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1996.
Faris, Abū Husayn bin al. Maqᾱ᾿ῑs al-Lughah. Misr, 1390 A.H.
Feigl, Herbert., and Wilfrid Sellars. Reading in Philosophical Analysis. New York: Crafts Inc, 1949.
Fyrowz Ᾱbᾱdῑ, Muḥammad bin Ya῾qūb. Qamūs al-Muḥῑṭ. Cairo: Muṣṭafᾱ Bᾱbῑ al-Ḥalbῑ, 1371 A.H.
al-Ghazali, Muḥammad bin Muḥammad, Al-Mustaṣfᾱ. Egypt: Al-Maṭba῾ al-Amῑriyyah, 1346 A. H.
Gupta, O. M. Encyclopedia of Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. Delhi: Isha Books, D-43, Adrash Nagar. 1996.
Hamῑdullᾱh, Muḥammad. The Emergence of Islam. Islamabad: Islamic Research Institute, 1993.
Al-Haramayn, Abdul Malik, Al-Burhān. Beirut: n. p., 1978.
Heydon’s Case. 1584. 2 W. L, R. at 1656.
Holland J.A. and J. S. Webb. Learning Legal Rules. London: Blackstone, 2003.
Ibn ‘Ᾱshūr, Tᾱhir. Maqᾱṣid al-Sharῑʻah al-Islᾱmiyyah. ed. Muḥammad Tahir. Dᾱr al-Baiῑr lῑ al-Intaj al-‘Ilmῑ, 1988.
Ibn al-Ḥᾱjib. Mukhtaṣar al-Muntahᾱ. Miṣr: Al-Maṭba῾ al-Amῑriyyah, 1989.
Ibn Manẓur, Muḥammad bin Mukarram. Lisan al-Arab. Beirut: Tab’a Dᾱr Sadir, 1300 A.H.
Ibn Mᾱjah, Imᾱm Hᾱfiẓ al-Qazwinῑ. Sunan ibn-Mᾱjah. Beirut: Dᾱr al-Ma῾rifah, 1997.
Ibn Taymiyyah, Taqī ad-Dīn Aḥmad ibn Abd al-Halim ibn Abd al-Salam al-Numayri al-Ḥarrānī. Al-Musawwaddah fῑ Uṣūl al-Fiqh.Cairo: Maṭba῾ a-Sunnah al- Muḥammadiyah, 1953.
Izz al- Dῑn,῾Abd al-Salᾱm. Qawᾱ᾿id al-Aḥkᾱm fῑ Maṣᾱlh al-Ᾱ᾿nᾱm. Edited by ‘Abdul Ghani, Damishq: Dᾱr al-Taba’ li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzi’, 1992.
Kerr, Malcolm H. Islamic Reforms: The Political and legal Theories of Muḥammad ‘Abduh and Rashῑd Riḍᾱ. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1966.
Al-Khidhri, Muḥammad Abi Bakr. Tᾱrῑkh al-Tashrῑ῾ al-Islᾱmῑ. Miṣr: Al-Maktabah al-Tijᾱriyyah, 1967.
Leiter, Brain. Objectivity in Law and Morality. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
Lock, John. Human Understanding. New York: Dover Publications, Ltd, 1964.
Mas῾ūd bin ῾Umar bin ῾Abd Allᾱh, al-Taftᾱzᾱnῑ, Al-Talwῑh fῑ Kashf al-Haqᾱ᾿iq al-Tanqῑh. Misr: Dᾱr al-Kutab al-Arabiyyah, 1327 A.H.
Al-Mᾱwardῑ. Ᾱdᾱb al-Qᾱḍῑ. Baghdad: n. p., 1972.
Milson, S. F. C. Historical Foundation of the Common Law. London: n. p., 1981.
Muḥammad bin ‘Abd Allᾱh, Ibn al-Arabi, Ahkᾱm al-Qur᾿ᾱn. edited by Muḥammad al-Bajᾱwῑ, 4 vol. Misr: Dᾱr Ihyᾱ al-Kutub, 1978.
Muḥammad bin Mukarram. Ibn Manẓūr, Lisᾱn al-Arab. Beirut: Tab’a Dᾱr Sadir, 1350 A.H.
Muḥammad bin Sa῾d, Abū ‘Abd ῾Allᾱh. Ṭabaqᾱt al-Kubra. Cairo: Dᾱr al-Teḥrῑr, 1388 A.H.
Muḥammad bin Ya῾qūb, Fyrowz Ᾱbᾱdῑ. Qamūs al-Muḥῑṭ. Cairo: Muṣṭafᾱ Bᾱbῑ al-Ḥalbῑ, 1371 A.H.
Al-Nῑsᾱ Būrῑ, Abd al-Malik bin ῾Abd Allᾱh bin Yūsuf. Al-Warqᾱt wa al-Talkhῑṣ fῑ Uṣūl al-Fiqh. Miṣr: Al-Maṭba῾ al-Amῑriyyah, 1986.
Razi, Naseem. “Ijtihᾱd al-Maqᾱṣidῑ or Purposive Interpretation: A Comparative Analysis in Modern Context.” Al-Qalam 18, no.1. June (2013).
—. “Implementation of the Judicial Rights of Mustafa (SAW): An Analysis in the light of the Judicial System of Pakistan.” Pakistan Journal of Islamic Research, ISSN: 2070-0326.Vol. 16, (December 2015): 89-103.
Al-Sarakhsῑ, Muhammad bin Sahl. Al-Mabsūṭ. Misr: Matba’h al-Sa’adah, 1326 A.H.
Al-Shᾱṭibῑ, Abū Isḥᾱq Ibrᾱhῑm bin Mūsᾱ.’ Al-Muwᾱfaqᾱt. Misr: Matba῾ al-Salfiyyah, 1341A.H.
Al-Shafi’i, Muhammad bin Idris. Al-Risalah. Misr: Taba’ Misriyah, 1988.
Al-Shatibi, Ibrᾱhῑm bin Mūsᾱ, Abū Ishᾱq. Kitᾱb al-I῾tiṣᾱm. Beirut, Dᾱr al-Ma῾ᾱrif, 1389A.H.
al-Shawkani, Muḥammad bin ῾Alῑ bin Muhammad. Irshᾱd al-Fuḥūl. Miṣr: Muṣtafᾱ Bᾱb al-Ḥalbῑ, 1967.
Al-Shῑrᾱzῑ, Ibrᾱhῑm bin ῾Alῑ, Abῑ Ishᾱq. Farūz Ᾱbᾱdῑ, Qᾱmūs al-Muḥῑṭ. Cairo: Muṣtafᾱ Bᾱb al-Halbῑ, 1371 A.H.
Slapper and Kelly, The English Legal System. London: Cavendish Publishing Ltd., 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781843145110
Sutherland, J.G. Statutes and Statutory Interpretation. Chicago: Callagham and Company, 1943.
Al-Tabrῑzῑ, Abū ‘Abd Muḥammad bin ῾Abd Allᾱh. Mishkᾱt al-Maṣᾱbῑḥ.Hind: Matba῾ Lakhnaw, 1998.
Al-Thᾱlbῑ, Muḥammad Husayn. Al-Tafsῑr wa al-Mufassirūn. Cairo: Maktabah Wahᾱb, 1995.
The Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. Lahore: Mansoor Book House, 2009.
Al-Yūbῑ, uḥammad Sa῾d bin Aḥmad. Maqᾱṣid al-Sharῑʻah al-Islᾱmiyyah ‘Ilᾱ qᾱti῾ūhᾱ bil ‘Adillah. Riyᾱdh: Dᾱr al-Hijrah li al-Nashr wa al-Tawzῑ῾, 1998.
Wilfred, E. Rumble. The Thought of John Austin: Jurisprudence, Colonial Reform and the British Constitution. London: Athlone Press, 1985.
Zander, M. The Law Making Process. London: Butterworths, 1999.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
.png){kind=icon}
