CILE International Seminar

The State and Public Morality in Muslim Contexts and Beyond 9-11 May 2022

Background Paper

Dr. Abdessamad Belhaj

CISMOC-UC Louvain, Research Institute for Religion and Society-NUPS

1. Summary

In Muslim contexts and beyond, modern states play a central role in regulating public morality. Yet, there remains a paucity of research on the decisions and actions taken at state level with regard to moral issues. In particular, only few studies in the field of Islamic ethics have been dedicated to why and how the state enforces ethical norms in society. To bridge this gap in our field, we convene a research seminar whose main objective is to explore the interplay of state and public morality in Muslim-majority countries and other regions around the globe. This seminar provides an opportunity for researchers worldwide to contribute to these important discussions and to critically examine related concrete cases, examples, and broad questions.

States use various registers in order to take action and claim authority over moral issues in the public space: law, ethical standards, sharia, pragmatism, authoritarianism, etc. It is therefore necessary to address the question of legitimacy and the justification of state intervention (or non-intervention) on moral issues. The state’s role in public morality (gender norms, schools, family, army, or religious institutions), can be seen differently through dissimilar political and philosophical lenses; depending on whether they endorse liberal vs conservative or individualistic vs communitarian views, some ethical standpoints justify this role while others are critical and sometimes even suspicious about the state’s action in public morality. This research seminar aims to offer a wide range of perspectives and views on the scope and limits of the state's role in public morality.

The Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE) will host the proceedings of this Seminar and invite researchers to submit their research papers (written in English or Arabic) on this topic. The proceedings will result in a peer- reviewed publication, either in the form of an edited volume in the book-series Studies in Islamic Ethics or a thematic issue in the Journal of Islamic Ethics, both published by Brill.

2. Background

Recently, various actions of the state in the Muslim world heightened tension around the scope and limits of state’s role in public morality. In Iran, the police arrested in November 2020 a group of young people for drinking alcohol and taking off the headscarf.1 In early 2021, Turkey decided to withdraw from the Istanbul Convention, a European treaty on violence against women and the decision was justified by reference to the need to protect family values.2 Also in early 2021, Saudi authorities arrested a medical doctor who became involved in practices judged as unlawful, including abortion and hymen reconstruction.3 At the same time, public authorities in Morocco detained a group of young people who broke their fasting during the month of Ramadan, sparking a new debate in the country.4 Finally, during the same period, the researcher Said Djabelkhir was detained in Algeria for denigrating Islam after he criticized the feast of ʿĪd al-Aḍḥā and other practices in Islam.5

In these debates about morality in the public space, the role of religion is not discussed consistently and emphatically. Thus, secular states, including Western liberal countries such as France, the UK, and the US, also claim executive moral authority in the public space. In the UK, for example, it is an offence to practice sexual intercourse in the public.6 Most British people would acknowledge the state’s authority in public morality and would request the police to hold a couple for having sex in the park.7 France has also witnessed a debate about the limits of the state’s role in public morality by banning headscarves in public space8.

Oftentimes, legal instruments foster the state’s role in public morality (for example Moroccan authorities justify their arrest of those who break the rules of fasting during the month of Ramadan by the Penal code, article 222). At times, in regard to mandatory vaccination or drinking alcohol, states act without the support of legislation. Some states would use medieval Islamic concepts of public law such as ḥisba (Egypt) or commanding right and forbidding wrong (Saudi Arabia) to force morality in the public space. Other states would endorse a moralising role through

إيران-بالمختصر/اعتقال-19-شخصًا-من-أعضاء-فريق-سياحي-في-قم-بتهمة-خلع-الحجاب-وتناول https://iranintl.com/ar/- 1 ?page=17الكحول

2 https://theconversation.com/turkey-erdogans-decision-to-pull-out-of-istanbul-convention-has-put- him-in-opposition-to-women-157753

السلطات-السعودية-تلقى-القبض-على-طبيبة-تجرى-عمليات-إجهاض-وترقيعwww.youm7.com/story/2021/1/14/5157263/  3

التدين-لا-يُفرض-بالقانون-جدل-بالمغرب-لاعتقال-مفطرين-في-رمضانwww.alhurra.com/morocco/2021/04/20/  4

جدل-في-الجزائر-لمحاكمة-باحث-بتهمة-الإساءة-للإسلامwww.alhurra.com/algeria/2021/03/08/  5

6 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42

7 https://metro.co.uk/2021/06/17/naked-couple-arrested-while-having-sex-in-park-near- playground-14789768/

8 https://www.conseil-etat.fr/ressources/etudes-publications/rapports-etudes/etudes/etude- relative-aux-possibilites-juridiques-d-interdiction-du-port-du-voile-integral ministries of religious affairs which de facto make these states religious authorities in the public sphere.

The above-outlined examples (and many more could be added) illustrate the difficulty that states face in Muslim contexts, and beyond, to justify their authority of Etat moralisateur (the moralising state) as put by the French scholar of public law Cédric Groulier).9 Groulier et al. argue that the state went through a transformation and increasingly acts in the capacity of “a teacher” to society: either by seeking to promote moral values, or at least to guide conduct towards an order of values considered to be virtuous, or by condemning certain behaviours judged to be immoral or contrary to the dominant values in society. Groulier et al. also identified several manifestations of the moralising state in political discourses and actions, on a national and international scale, including the domain of law, as represented in courts, health care, humanitarian work, taxes, and bioethics, comprising cases from France, Tunisia, and Bosnia. Furthermore, they underlined a plethora of motivations behind this tendency of the state to interfere in public morality, from interest groups to moralisation as a means of reasserting itself or compensating for its loss of influence, or even protecting itself. Additionally, the authors of L'État moralisateur also showed the implications of moralising restrictions on establishing a balance between individual liberties and communal duties.10

3. Main Themes and Questions

The state’s role in public morality can be elaborated through the following sub-questions which are intended as guideposts rather than limitations. Other subsets of questions are welcome in order to expand the scope of the seminar as wide as possible.

3.1 The functions and limits of the state’s moral authority

A first group of questions could address the tension around the state’s moralising function: Is the protection of values a prerogative of the state? To what extent can the state “protect values” in a Muslim context? Should the state prioritize the individual’s freedom or the community’s beliefs and interests? Does the state have a moral authority or sovereignty over the moral landscape? Do inclusive policies entail managing morality, as Clem Henricson holds11? What are the limits on seeking maṣlaḥa? From the standpoint of Islamic ethics, is it up to the state alone to define and promote the public good? Can the state make the rule and the exceptions at the same time (tax collector, and yet, issuing tax amnesties or arresting locals for drinking alcohol while selling alcohol to Western tourists)? Can the state allow other political actors to enforce morality in the public space? What are the political

9 Cédric Groulier (ed.) L'État moralisateur : regard interdisciplinaire sur les liens contemporains entre morale et action publique, Paris : Mare & Martin, 2014.

10 Idem.

11 Clem Henricson, Morality and Public Policy, Bristol: Policy Press, 2016, p. 21.

  purposes that motivate a state to intervene (or not) in public morality? Can the state guarantee morality within its institutions? In what way do states differ across the globe in claiming moral authority?

3.2 Islamic ethics on the state’s moralising role

One of the possible questions to be examined during this seminar is how Muslim scholars, like al-Māwardī, al-Ghazālī and Ibn Taymiyya, approached the moral authority of the state, its scope and limits, and its relationship to public interest; submitted research papers could also discuss the roles judges and market inspectors often played in public morality and the legitimate ways and objectives permitted by Islamic political ethics to enforce public morality by the state.12 The Muslim scholarly discussions on the role of the state in commanding right and forbidding wrong (in pre-modern Islamic ethics) and in public morality (in modern times) are pertinent for our understanding of the state’s moral authority. Contributions to this theme should show awareness of the diversity of positions with regard to this matter throughout the Islamic tradition.

3.3 The modern state and public morality in the Western scholarship

Few studies have investigated the relationship of the modern state to public morality in the Western scholarship. One possible explanation is that political science has usually shied away from normativity when it comes to governance. For this reason, an important component of this seminar will be dedicated to critical reviews and analyses of Western scholarship, which addressed the role of the state in public morality, especially from fields like political science, ethics, law, and sociology; we are principally interested in knowing how Western scholarship can be of help for understanding these issues and enriching relevant discussions within Muslim contexts.

Some vivid discussions on the moralising action of the state are currently taking place in specific countries such as France and Belgium and they are quite relevant to Islamic ethics. For example, there are debates about the neutrality of the state in a secular regime with regard to Muslim practices of clothing and eating in schools or about gender. Some voices claim that the state should protect Muslim women and gender equality within its borders (and beyond), while others promote the rights of Muslims to any ethical practice they wish to endorse as an individual right. Furthermore, theoretical discussions in the West about the boundaries between law and ethics, and the role of the state in legislating on ethical matters are also relevant to Islamic ethics, particularly as Muslim jurists and intellectuals debate the relationship between European laws, sharia, and ethics.13

12 S. Narotzky and E. Manzano, “The Ḥisba, the Muḥtasib and the Struggle over Political Power and a Moral Economy: An Enquiry into Institutions", Medieval Mediterranean, Vol. 101 (2014): 30-54.

13 Wael B. Hallaq, The Impossible State : Islam, Politics, and Modernity's Moral Predicament, New York: Columbia University Press, 2013.

  The Seminar will offer the opportunity for researchers to address a wide spectrum of cases across the world. We also welcome research papers that examine the type of arguments used by the state, in Muslim contexts and beyond, to justify its action or the different ways states mobilise ethics as an instrument of public policy. Moreover, the door is open for studies that examine particular interventions (and their nature whether religious, political or both) of the state in public morality and their implications.

4. Selection Criteria

All submitted papers will be peer-reviewed by an academic committee, and will be evaluated based on relevance, critical engagement, and field work:

4.1 Relevance: all papers should be pertinent to the question of the state’s moral action, aiming at unfolding its ambiguities, dynamics, and limits, as illustrated in section 3. Moreover, all studies should attempt to make a contribution to the field of Islamic ethics.

4.2 Theoretical papers are expected to display deep critical engagement (with different ethical traditions), demonstrating awareness of the main academic literature, a contribution to the scholarly discussions and a clear argumentation.

4.3 Case studies should originate from field work or developed familiarity with data in specific contexts. These research papers should not be merely descriptive or generalising; they have to provide sufficient data and analysis to allow comparison and showcase the complexity of the phenomenon.

5. Benefits

Authors who will be invited to this seminar will receive the following benefits:

• A refereed publication that has an international impact,
• The CILE will cover the expenses of making the publication available via open access,
• The CILE will also cover the travel and accommodation costs of all participants during the seminar to be held in Doha (under normal circumstances),
• Finally, a simultaneous translation of the presentations during this seminar as well as the translation of accepted papers (Arabic-English and English- Arabic) will be provided.

6. Practical Information & Deadlines

Interested researchers are kindly requested to send:

•   An abstract (300-500 words), which briefly outlines the endorsed argument and method,
• A short biography (150-200 words) about the participant’s credentials, academic affiliation, and main publications in the field of Islamic ethics,
• Selected participants, who will be invited to present their papers in this research seminar, will be expected to send their articles (between 7,000 and 9,000 words) according to the planned schedule (see below). Full papers should follow the style outline in the attached file “Instructions for Authors”.

While applying to this research seminar, please keep track of the following important dates:

• 30 November, 2021: Deadline for submitting an abstract and short biography,
• 07 December, 2021: Authors will be notified about the acceptance (or not) of their abstracts,
• 10 March, 2022: Selected participants submit their full-text papers.
• 10 April 2022: Authors will be notified about the acceptance (or not) of their full-text papers,
• 09-11 May, 2022: The proceedings of the seminar will take place in Doha,
• 10 July, 2022: Deadline to submit the revised versions of all papers.

7. Languages

Submitted abstracts and full papers should be written in either English or Arabic.

8. Publication Plan

The accepted research papers within this seminar will undergo a thorough peer- review and editing process, and will be published either in the form of an edited volume in the book series Studies in Islamic Ethics or a thematic issue in the Journal of Islamic Ethics, both published by Brill.

9. Call for Papers

The Doha-based Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics (CILE) is delighted to invite scholars, academics and researchers to submit their research papers to a closed three-day seminar on The State and Public Morality in Muslim Contexts and Beyond to be held in Doha during the period of May 9-11, 2022.

The seminar is convened by Dr. Abdessamad Belhaj, CISMOC-UCLouvain, Research Institute for Religion and Society-NUPS. The proceedings will result in a peer-reviewed and Open-Access publication, either in the form of an edited volume in the book-series Studies in Islamic Ethics or a thematic issue in the Journal of Islamic Ethics, both published by Brill.

10. Contact Us

Submissions must be sent to public.morality@cilecenter.org. Please note that only submissions sent to this e-mail address will be considered and evaluated.

For any inquiries about this call-for-papers, or about the accompanying Background Paper, please contact

• Dr. Abdessamad Belhaj (abdessamad.belhaj@uclouvain.be), CISMOC- UCLouvain, Research Institute for Religion and Society-NUPS.
• Dr. Mohammed Ghaly (mghaly@hbku.edu.qa), the Academic Director of the Research Center for Islamic Legislation & Ethics (CILE), CIS, HBKU.

For more information about CILE, please visit the website: https://www.cilecenter.org/

For inquiries about the Journal of Islamic Ethics or the book-series Studies in Islamic Ethics, please contact jie@brill.com or visit https://www.editorialmanager.com/JIE/default.aspx

11. References

Gordon L. Anderson and Morton A. Kaplan (eds.), Morality and Religion in Liberal Democratic Societies, New York: Paragon House, 1992.

Abdessamad Belhaj, “Law and Order According to Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya: A Re-Examination of siyāsa sharʿiyya”, in: Islamic Theology, Philosophy and Law : Debating Ibn Taymiyya and Ibn Qayyim al- Jawziyya, Eds. Birgit Krawietz and Georges Tamer, Berlin ; Boston : De Gruyter, 2013, pp. 400-421.

Michael Allan Cook, Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong in Islamic Thought, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

P. Devlin, The Enforcement of Morals, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1965.

William A. Galston, “Public Morality and Religion in the Liberal State”, Political Science & Politics 19 (1986): 807-824.

Cédric Groulier (ed.) L'État moralisateur : regard interdisciplinaire sur les liens contemporains entre morale et action publique, Paris: Mare & Martin, 2014.

Wael B. Hallaq, The Impossible State : Islam, Politics, and Modernity's Moral Predicament, New York: Columbia University Press, 2013.

Clem Henricson, Morality and Public Policy, Bristol: Policy Press, 2016.

Salwa Ismail, “Religious “Orthodoxy” as Public Morality: The State, Islamism and Cultural Politics in Egypt”, Critique: Critical Middle Eastern Studies 8 (1999): 25- 47.

Christian Joppke, “Islam and the Legal Enforcement of Morality”, Theory and Society 43 (2014): 589-615.

C. Knill, “The Study of Morality Policy: Analytical Implications from a Public Policy Perspective”, Journal of European Public Policy, 20(2013): 309–317

Basil Mitchell, Law, Morality, and Religion in a Secular Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978.

Alexander Nachman, “Outside of the Law: Khomeini’s Legacy of Commanding Right and Forbidding Wrong in the Islamic Republic”, Sociology of Islam 7, (2019): 1-21.

S. Narotzky and E. Manzano, “The Ḥisba, the Muḥtasib and the Struggle over Political Power and a Moral Economy: An Enquiry into Institutions”, Medieval Mediterranean, Vol. 101 (2014): 30-54.

Daniel F. Piar, “Morality as a Legitimate Government Interest “, The Penn State Law Review 117 (2012):139-169.

Herbert Schambeck, Ethik und Staat, Berlin : Duncker & Humblot, 1986.

A. P. Simester, “Enforcing Morality”, in: The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Law, edited by A. Marmor, New York: Routledge, 2012, pp. 481-494.

Don Welch, “The State As a Purveyor of Morality”, George Washington Law Review 56 (1988): 540–546.

Report on International Seminar: “The State and Public Morality in Muslim Contexts and Beyond”

Between May 9th and May 11, 2022, the Research Center for Islamic Legislation and Ethics  (CILE) hosted an international seminar titled “The State and Public Morality in Muslim Contexts and Beyond” convened by Dr. Abdessamad Belhaj (UCLouvain, Belgium). The seminar was held through CILE’s funded research program for professors outside CILE, offering researchers the opportunity to present their working papers. This seminar was hosted through hybrid mechanisms, enabling participants to attend offsite, virtually, and physically, onsite in Doha.

Beginning with the opening remarks given by Dr. Belhaj and Dr. Mohammed Ghaly (CILE’s Acting Director), the seminar started with Dr. Belhaj’s explanation of why he chose CILE to host this seminar, maintaining CILE’s leading role in promoting the study of Islamic ethics, both as the only center specialized in the field and through its Journal of Islamic Ethics. He also spoke on why he chose the topic of morality and the state, and raised several questions, including:

• Do states have the right to mandate that citizens take measures against COVID?
• Do states have the right to take moral action against citizens?
• Do states have the right to dictate their citizens’ dress (modesty/immodesty, and banning hijab)?
• Do Islamic states have the right to punish citizens for apostasy?
• Do Islamic states have the right to punish people who eat during Ramadan?

Dr. Belhaj also praised the diversity of the seminar’s participants, who not only came from different academic fields and encouraged interdisciplinarity, but were also of diverse cultural and geographic backgrounds, bringing many ethical approaches and solutions to the forefront of discussions.

Dr. Ghaly then spoke about how CILE can continue supporting other Islamic ethics researchers. It encourages continuous academic partnership and exchange with researchers outside CILE, and many of CILE’s activities are held in association with other institutions, research centers, and universities.

Researchers have the opportunity to publish their work through:

• the Visiting Professor program, hosted for one semester, where professors gain research funding, and may also teach a course in the Masters of Arts in Applied Islamic Ethics,
• the Journal of Islamic Ethics, published by Brill and indexed by Scopus,
• the Studies in Islamic Ethics Series, published by Brill
• an international conference (hosted once a year)
• the CILE Winter and Summer Schools, with the upcoming 2022 Summer School Sports Ethics and Islam being held on July 18 & 19, 2022.

First Day Presentations (May 9, 2022)

The seminar began with the first paper by Dr. Louay Safi (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University) titled “Political Values between the Past and Present: A Textual and Historical Reading.” Dr. Safi started with a discussion of ethics in the public sphere and the political realm, arguing that social values can be perfected, especially in modern Western societies where ethical foundations are hidden since monotheistic values have been disregarded for secular ones. He pushed for an egalitarian society based on four principles, moral agency, equal dignity, pluralism, and the rule of law, intrinsic to monotheistic Abrahamic traditions. Dr. Safi then maintained that moral authenticity, especially of political and social figures, is intrinsic to spreading moral values in a society, since these figures are seen as moral authorities. Further, ideas such as John Locke’s three rights, property, liberty, and life, affirm monotheistic values not only found in Christianity, but also found in the Prophet Muhammad’s Farewell Sermon. Other shared values between monotheistic societies include the “ethics of duty” (German Romanticism), political accountability, and the ethical evaluation of political authorities. These concepts are essential to a society’s maslaha (common good) which governs public policy. Dr. Safi concluded by explaining that there are power tensions that have remained throughout history - idealism and realism - and many of the issues we face today are because of shifts between these two. To reconcile this, he recommended that Muslim thinkers and societies collaborate with other thinkers to re-establish and advance monotheistic values.

Dr. Mohammed Amezzian (Qatar University) presented the second paper, “The Moral and the Political, between Internalization and Privacy: A Study in Political Islamic Communities.” Offered in Arabic, this presentation centered on the separation between morality and politics. He began by describing the historical, political, and religious realities of this relationship, specifically in European Christian societies of the medieval period, and linked this to violating social laws (immorality) on the basis of maintaining a state’s sovereignty and security. One of the key issues, in his view, is that liberal Arab thinkers have imported this concept into Arab (majority Muslim) societies. In doing so, they have disregarded morals in favor of preserving certain political and social rights and legitimizing tyrannical rule. Dr. Amezzian then emphasized the importance of constructing a political society with participative morality, strengthening political identity and creating a sense of belonging through the concept of the Ummah. To do this, societies must abide by a moral contract that upholds religious devotion, political loyalty, and societal compassion, while also maintaining a mutual commitment of societal obedience to advance values of justice.

The day’s final session was “Polemic on the Authority of Hisba as Public Morality Enforcement in the View of Ibn Khaldun and Al-Ghazali” by Anggi Azzuhri (Taskopruzade Research Institute). Before delving into a discussion of hisba, Azzhuri problematized the distinction between Sharia and secular legal codes, as Sharia applies both publicly and privately, while legal codes only apply in the public sphere. One of his key issues was the question of where hisba (communal morality) should be applied, which authority - secular police, religious police, or hisba departments - has the responsibility of enforcing it, and in what cases and contexts. He theorizes this by relying on the works of Ibn Khaldun and al-Ghazali, since they represent the realistic and ideal approaches respectively, and separates the two approaches to hisba into two groups - Institutionalist (literal textual reading upheld by authorities) and Individualist (figurative reading applicable to all individuals). After his discussion of the difference between these two methods and their concepts of hisba, Azzhuri made distinctions between the differing understandings of “public space” and ma‘ruf (virtue) and munkar (vice). He concluded his presentation by maintaining that studying these two approaches is important because they are alternatives to mainstream conceptions of hisba (al-Mawardi and Ibn Taymiyya), and proposed further research of the Ottoman state’s understanding of hisba, which is understudied due to a lack of translated sources.

Second Day Presentations (May 10, 2022)

Dr. Carool Kersten (KU Leuven) began the second day’s sessions with his paper “Statehood, Religion, and Public Morality in Indonesia.” Even though Indonesia is geographically removed from the Muslim world’s “heartland,” it mirrors the continuous fluid nature of Muslim societies. While the Dutch colonial state did not tolerate political Islam, Indonesians consumed Islamic modernists’ texts through print sources. Muslim organizations, notably Nahdat al-‘Ulama’ (Scholars’ Renaissance), and the Majlis al-Shura (Consultative Council) emerged to play important roles in enforcing Islamic morality in Indonesia’s public sphere. The most important doctrine on religion was conceived in the 1940s, the Panchasila (Five Principles) Doctrine, mandating that citizens subscribe to one of Indonesia’s five major religions - Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, Confucianism, or Daoism. Because atheism is not recognized under the Panchasila, Indonesians who publicly declare it are punished by law, meaning that, as Dr. Kersten explained, Indonesia is not an Islamic state, but a state concerned with controlling religion, instead of banning it completely. With increasing social Islamization in the 1980s, Indonesian public life changed, and, as a result, men’s and women’s dress became more Islamic, Islamic education was more widespread, and the state used Islamic principles to convince Indonesians to be law-abiding citizens. It is important to note, however, that much of Indonesia’s legal system is still based on Dutch law. Islamic law only applies to family and personal status matters. Since there is no official religious department to enforce hisba, the police often do so on the basis of public opinion.

The second presentation, “Legal Enforcement of Islamic Morality and the Rule of Change: A Study of Modern Iran,” was by Dr. Zahra Azhar (Iran United States Claims Tribunal) and Dr. Shirin Boroomand (Shahid Beheshti University). The authors focused on the relationship between Sharia and the Iranian legal system, starting with a theoretical discussion of legal concepts, specifically Herbert Hart’s definitions of the “rule of recognition” and the “rule of change.” In Iran, the primary legal actor is the Guardian Council, which ensures that all legislation conforms to Islamic law (Sharia). This, however, causes problems for the state as Sharia-validated laws are often passed later than citizens require them. Dr. Boroomand also made a distinction between positive and critical morality, which impact understandings and applications of religious normativity, with Iran’s legal system upholding elements of critical normativity. Social challenges to this legal system included applications of the concept of the Ummah, which may alienate non-Muslims and disregard the reality of multi-religious and multi-ethnic Iran, as well as laws regarding women, which discriminate against them based on Sharia-backed guardianship laws. They concluded by arguing that states with majority Muslim populations face issues in reconciling Sharia with modern legal systems - as is the case with the Iranian Guardian Council, which presents a firm understanding of Sharia and contributes to the distrust some Iranians have in the Islamic legal system.

The day’s final paper was Dr. Shoko Watanabe’s (University of Tokyo) “Translating Islamic Ethics into Modern Institutions: Debates on the Separation of Islam and State in Colonial Algeria, 1947-1954.” Before delving into the case of colonial Algeria, she began by contextualizing the role of Islamic authority in France through the Conseil Français du Culte Musulman, which plays a mediatory role between the French government and Islam. Next, Dr. Watanabe discussed the issue of authority in Islam and linked this to the roles religious organizations may play, as France encouraged the secularization of religion, both, at home and abroad in colonized states. She then explained the historical context of Islam in colonial Algeria, demonstrating the French state’s rigid surveillance and restriction of Muslims and Islamic activity. This control inspired Algerians to propose the adoption of new laws - introduced by French-educated lawyer Salah Mesbah, along with independent scholars and Algeria's key associations of Qadis (judges), ‘Ulama (scholars), cultural chiefs, and official religious agents - that would increase religious institutions’ representative political power. While these actors held different ideas about the official religious organizations’ roles and structures, in backing these new laws, they supported a new approach to official religion that would minimize colonial management of Islam. The French eventually rejected these draft laws because they would have given Muslims increased political power and would have made Christian France’s control of Islam more difficult. Dr. Watanabe concluded her presentation by recalling the issue management of religious institutions poses from legal and ethical standpoints, as there were “competing ideas” regarding these institutions and their roles, and the application of siyasa shar‘iya (Sharia governance).

Third Day Presentations (May 11, 2022)

The first presentation, “Islamic Law and the State in the Gulf: The Political Work of Qāḍī ‘Abd Allāh b. Zayd Āl Maḥmūd (1911–1997),” was by Dr. Alexandre Caeiro (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University). He traced changes in Qatar’s legal system during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries to demonstrate that the previous system of legal pluralism was consolidated into a centralized system. He relied on the works of Chief Qadi ‘Abd Allah b. Zayd Al Mahmud to argue that Qatar’s legal system differed from other formerly colonized states; its legal system was not based on Napoleonic codes. In fact, Sharia court judges helped maintain social and economic justice, and advanced women’s rights. While these Qadis saw themselves as non-state actors, they played important social and religious roles in the emerging state, with their work acting as the “foundational” precedents for modern Qatari laws. Dr. Caeiro also explained that court proceedings were free and did not require the assistance of lawyers, which benefited society as the proceedings were simple and allowed people to receive judgments quickly, through multiple sources of official and unofficial mediation. Sharia scholars also wrote about politics, critiqued governmental policies, and worked to hold the ruling family accountable when necessary. In doing so, Sharia judges in Qatar moralized political activity and guided authority figures in negotiating the legalities and ethics of their work.

Dr. Takao Kenichiro (Middle East Institute of Japan) presented the next paper, “Public Morality Facing Modernity in Saudi Arabia: the Case of the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.” He followed the change of the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice’s (PVPV) role in Saudi Arabia and began his discussion with a historical background of the rise of the Saudi state and official Wahhabism. The phrase, “the promotion of virtue and prevention of vice” is repeated in the Quran, and was established in medieval Islamic medieval jurisprudence, fiqh, as hisba, which, according to al-Mawardi, refers to “promoting virtue when neglected.” The Muhtasib officer takes on the hisba maintaining role and used to patrol markets in the medieval period to ensure fair trade. Yet, in Saudi Arabia, the PVPV has faced many criticisms for its actions, including gender-related ones such as the 2002 girls’ school fire where male firefighters were banned from entering a girls’ school, as the girls were uncovered, and 15 young girls died. This later resulted in reforms under King Abdullah which banned the PVPV’s arrests and ended their “volunteers’ patrol” program. Since 2016, under the Saudi Vision 2030, the PVPV has promoted openness, and was eventually replaced by the Ministry of Interior in 2019. Indeed, as Dr. Kenichiro argued, the Saudi state has transformed crimes that would be previously classified as violating religious law, to, instead, be violating secular law. He concluded his presentation by affirming the impact liberalization has had on the PVPV’s changing role, as the state attempts to return to a pre-1979 Islamically “moderate” Saudi, that not only accommodates its majority youthful population, but also advances a forward-thinking society.

The seminar’s final paper was presented by Rasha Bader (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University), titled “Enforcing public morality through public health policy: an exploration of public health ethics and Islamic ethics through tobacco control as an applied example.” She began by formulating a methodological approach to the issue, as individual and lifestyle behaviors are classified under public morality and behavior acts as a determinant of health. She came to the conclusion that the contemporary Islamic discourse fails to offer a solution that reconciles between the competing demands of tobacco usage and banning tobacco, as it, instead, presents medical and political normativity as religious. In secular discourses, for example, state interference in public health is justified as it relates to society's needs - physical health is an end advanced by individual behavior, while social well-being is advanced by public conduct. To resolve this, Bader suggested that there be a firm Islamic approach to obligation and autonomy as it relates to health, since health is a public good (maslaha). Indeed, as she proposed in her presentation, the COVID issue may have been better dealt with, from an Islamic public health perspective, if there was a more solid precedent of managing smoking in Muslim contexts.

Finally, the seminar’s concluding remarks were offered by Dr. Belhaj and Dr. Ghaly who thanked the participants for their contributions to the issue of moralizing and the state. Dr. Belhaj ended the seminar by summarizing the key points that emerged, including:

• questions of authenticity and different social contexts
• how the concept of moralization is understood,
• how to translate “dignity” and “individual freedoms” in a Muslim context,
• how to define Sharia
• Should Sharia play a role in the public space?
• Should legal and moral institutions be secular?
• What are the limits and responsibilities of the state, society, and individuals in moralizing and maintaining public good?

Besides the speakers above, seminar participants also included other Hamad Bin Khalifa University faculty, including Dr. Ray Jureidni, Dr. Mutaz al-Khatib, and Dr. Samer Rashwani.

• Dr. Louay Safi (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University).
• Dr. Mohammed Amezzian, QU.
• Anggi Azzuhri (Taskopruzade Research Institute)
• Dr. Carool Kersten (KU Leuven)
• Dr. Zahra Azhar (Iran United States Claims Tribunal)
• Dr. Shirin Boroomand (Shahid Beheshti University)
• Dr. Shoko Watanabe’s (University of Tokyo)
• Dr. Alexandre Caeiro (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University)
• Dr. Takao Kenichiro (Middle East Institute of Japan)
• Rasha Bader (CIS, Hamad Bin Khalifa University)