Decoding the contestation over public space: rights-based or power-driven?

Purpose Drawing on theories from French social theorists like Lefebvre and Foucault, particularly the concepts of power, “territory” and “boundary,” public spaces can be viewed as a manifestation of the spatial territorialization of power. Public space as a socio-spatial territory often becomes a setting for power contestation. Calls for the “right to the city,” initiated by Lefebvre in 1968 challenge the power relations in space. However, these challenges, primarily concerning the perceptible manifestations of power such as spatial democracy, marginalization, exclusion, diversity and accessibility, perform within the well-established framework of the authorized discourse of power spatiality. They do not call to alter the spatial “boundaries” of power, i.e. they don't challenge the spatial territorialization of power. The paper aims to decoding contestation in public space, with particular attention to the interplay between rights and power dynamics. It introduces a non-capitalist model of public space, that is the traditional Islamic one, as a potential alternative to the existing capitalist model. Focusing on the maps of rights as existed in Islamic societies rather than those of power, the paper explores the spatial structure of Islamic cities, particularly concerning ownership and control. Design/methodology/approach The paper employs a qualitative, non-empirical methodology grounded in content analysis and comparative historical interpretation, drawing on primary and secondary documentary sources, and includes a few urban examples to support its argument. Source selection is guided by clear criteria – relevance, authorial authority and historical significance – and findings are triangulated across multiple materials to ensure interpretive rigor. Findings Contestation over public space in capitalist contexts lies in questions of rights to and within it, its social territorial layer, while the spatial power-based layer of public space remains largely unquestioned. Hence, calls for the “right to the city” become unattainable. The traditional Islamic rights-based model offers a potential alternative to contemporary conceptions of public space. Instead of advocating for “public” public space within modern urban contexts, the open spaces of Islamic cities were structured through cumulative ownership and control rights, a framework that effectively limited domination and mitigated uneven power distribution. Originality/value The paper demonstrates originality in the framework it develops for examining power relations in public space. Drawing on Foucault's and Lefebvre's theories of territorialization, the paper approaches the issue from a unique angle, leading to original insights.