Equal Before God but Not Equal Before His Law? Sharia Law and Women’s Right to Interpretation in the Light of the Human Rights Debate

Over the last couple of decades, the subject of women’s rights in Islam has emerged as the central tension point in discussion about the (in)compatibility of Islam with the modern concept of universal human rights. This topic has drawn significant attention from both liberal and Muslim theorists, who have questioned the source of gender inequality and discrimination against women evident in various Muslim societies. These issues are particularly pronounced in certain provisions of Islamic family law, which appear to conflict with both Islamic principles and the concept of a just and merciful God. Simultaneously, another discussion is unfolding within inner-Muslim debate where Muslims are sharply divided over an important question: Is Sharia divinely created or humanly constructed? Within this debate, Islamic female theorists argue that not only is Sharia man-made law, but one constructed dominantly through the interpretations of male jurists, theologians, and thinkers, whereas female voices and experiences were marginalized, silenced, and excluded. This profoundly influenced the construction of Sharia and embedded hierarchical gender-power dynamics within its provisions. This article explores the topic through three key points: first, the question of the creation or construction of Sharia is examined, emphasizing the unquestionable interpretative role of humans in deciphering God’s Will; second, it argues that the construction process of Sharia was dominated and monopolized by male interpreters, who have read the Qur’an through the lens of the historical context of eighth- and ninth-century Arabia, where gender inequality was a norm; third, it highlights the voices of Islamic female theorists and their egalitarian interpretations of the Qur’an, which reflect the core Islamic message of a just and merciful God.