What Went Wrong? The Failure of Soviet Policy on sharī'a Courts in Turkestan, 1917-1923

2010 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 397-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Sartori

AbstractThe state's attitude towards sharī'a in Soviet Turkestan may seem to have been contradictory. There was a first phase, in the years 1919-1923, when attempts were made to harmonize Islamic law with Soviet legislation in order to better integrate sharī'a courts into the system of the Unified People's Courts. The second phase, starting in 1924, was marked by progressive erosion of the powers of the Islamic judiciary, until it was finally disbanded in 1928. These policy changes are usually explained in the light of a transitional period when the Soviet state in Central Asia accepted compromises as a way to consolidate its hold in the region while it waited for a suitable moment to do away with Islamic institutions. Conversely, the thesis of this paper is that the policy of integration of sharī'a courts into the Soviet legal system was abandoned in 1923 when it was perceived that it would ultimately be unsuccessful. The failure of this venture can be explained by looking at the approach the Soviet government adopted: it attempted to oversee the local judicial orders but the regulations issued were so loose in content as to prove practically ineffective. Soviet legislative bodies sought to define the scope of the shar'ī judiciary within the overall framework of state law, without realizing that qādīs had a range of legal instruments that enabled them to avoid applying Soviet legislation. Accordingly, the main goal of this study is to address the failure of the Soviet policy on sharī'a courts from two points of view: a) by reconstructing the administrative history behind the state decrees which made qādī courts official and regulated their scope; b) by showing how one qādī evaded the prohibition against hearing lawsuits on landholding by resolving disputes on the basis of amicable settlements (sulh).

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 157-171
Author(s):  
Jonathan Otto Pohl

Soviet policy towards its Kurds fluctuated and remained fragmented, ambivalent, and inconsistent throughout the existence of the USSR. On one hand, the Soviet government provided for the material and cultural development of Kurds in Armenia and Azerbaijan during the 1920s and 1930s. On the other hand, in 1937 it deported a number of Kurds from Azerbaijan and in 1944 an even larger number from Georgia to Kazakhstan and Central Asia as special settlers. The Soviet government only freed Kurdish special settlers from the legal restrictions limiting their movement and other rights in April 1956. Former Kurdish special settlers, however, could not return to the Caucasus. The Kurds remained a diaspora group in the USSR without any national territory and only limited cultural institutions. Only in the late 1980s did this situation change.ABSTRACT IN KURMANJIKurd li Yekîtiya Komarên Sosyalîst ên Sovyetan ji 1917 heta 1956Siyaseta Sovyetan beramber kurdên xwe, di hemû tarîxa YKSS de, pir caran guherî û hergav pirserî, xumam û nelihev bû. Li milekî, salên 1920an û 1930yan, dewleta Sovyetê îmkan dabîn kirin ji bo pêşketina çandî û samanî ya kurdên Ermenistan û Azerbeycanê. Li milê din, heman dewletê sala 1937an hejmareke kurdên Azerbeycanê û sala 1944an jî hejmareke pir mezintir a kurdên Gurcistanê wek muhacirên taybet şandine Qazaxistan û Asyaya Navendî. Dewleta Sovyetê şertên taybet ên li ser kurdên muhacir, yên ku bo nimûne nedihêlan ew ji cihekî biçin cihên din, bes di nîsana 1956an de rakirin. Lê belê, muhacirên kurd ên destê pêşiyê nekarîn bizivirine Qefqazyayê. Kurd li YKSS wek cemaeteke diasporayê veman bêyî ti erdekî xwe yê neteweyî û bi tenê bi hindek dezgehên çandî. Bi tenê salên dawî yên 1980an ev rewş guherî. ABSTRACT IN SORANIKurd le Yekyetî Sovîyet 1917 ta 1956Siyasetî Yekîyetî Sovyet le beramber Kurdekanî xoyda berz û nizmî be xoyewe bînîwe û le hemû temenî Yekîyetî Sovîyetda be şêweyekî natewaw, rarrayî û neguncaw mayewe. Le layenêkewe, ḧikumetî Yekîyetî Sovîyet, le nêwan sallekanî 1920 û 1930ekan, helumercî bo geşey binerretî û kultûrîy Kurdekan le Ermeniya û Azerbaycan rexisand. Le layenêkî tirewe, le sallî 1937 jimareyek le Kurdekanî le Azerbaycan derkird û tenanet le sallî 1944 jimareyekî zor ziyatir lewanî, wekû koçerî taybet, le Corciyawe rewaney Qezaxistan û Asyay Nawendî kird. Tenya le aprîlî 1956da, ḧikumetî Yekîyetî Sovîyet berbende yasayîyekanî le ser azadî hatûçû û mafekanî tirî em koçere taybetane hellweşandewe. Bellam, ew kurdaney ke pêştir kirabûn be koçer yan nêştecêy taybet boyan nebû bigerrênewe bo nawçey Qefqaz. Kurdekan wekû grupêkî diyaspora le Yekîyetî Sovîyetda manewe, bê ewey herêmêkî nîştimanîyan hebê û tenya çend enistîtoyekî kultûrîy sinûrdaryan pê dra. Tenya le kotayî heştakanî sedey bîstemda doxeke gorrankarî beserda hat.


Author(s):  
Munawar Haque

Abstract  The purpose of this article is to explore the views of Sayyid Abul AÑlÉ MawdËdÊ[1] on ijtihÉd.[2] It intends to trace the origins of MawdËdÊ’s ideas within the social, cultural and political context of his time, especially the increasing influence of modernity in the Muslim world.  The study will show that MawdËdÊ’s understanding of ijtihÉd and its scope demonstrates originality.  For MawdËdÊ, ijtihÉd is the concept, the process, as well as the mechanism by which the SharÊÑah,[3] as elaborated in the Qur’Én and the Sunnah[4] is to be interpreted, developed and kept alive in line with the intellectual, political, economic, legal, technological and moral development of society.  The notion of ijtihÉd adopted by MawdËdÊ transcends the confines of Fiqh[5] (jurisprudence) and tends therefore to unleash the dormant faculties of the Muslim mind to excel in all segments of life.   [1] Sayyid Abul AÑlÉ MawdËdÊ was born on September 25, 1903 in Awrangabad, a town in the present Maharashtra state of India in a deeply religious family.  His ancestry on the paternal side is traced back to the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him).  The family had a long-standing tradition of spiritual leadership, for a number of MawdËdÊ’s ancestors were outstanding leaders of ØËfÊ Orders.  One of the luminaries among them, the one from whom he derives his family name, was KhawÉjah QuÏb al-DÊn MawdËd (d. 527 AH), a renowned leader of the ChishtÊ ØËfÊ Order. MawdËdÊ died on September 22, 1979. See Khurshid Ahmad and Zafar Ishaq Ansari, “MawlÉnÉ Sayyid Abul AÑlÉ MawdËdÊ: An Introduction to His Vision of Islam and Islamic Revival,”, in Khurshd Ahmad and Zafar Ishaq Ansari (eds.) Islamic Perspectives: Studies in Honour of MawlÉnÉ Sayyid Abul A’lÉ MawdËdÊ,  (Leicester: The Islamic Foundation,1979), 360. [2]  In Islamic legal thought, ijtihÉd is understood as the effort of the jurist to derive the law on an issue by expending all the available means of interpretation at his disposal and by taking into account all the legal proofs related to the issue.  However, its scope is not confined only to legal aspect of Muslim society.  MawdËdÊ’s concept of ijtihÉd is defined as the legislative process that makes the legal system of Islam dynamic and makes its development and evolution in the changing circumstances possible.  This results from a particular type of academic research and intellectual effort, which in the terminology of Islam is called ijtihÉd.  The purpose and object of ijtihÉd is not to replace the Divine law by man made law.  Its real object is to properly understand the Supreme law and to impart dynamism to the legal system of Islam by keeping it in conformity with the fundamental guidance of the SharÊÑah and abreast of the ever-changing conditions of the world.  See Sayyid Abul AÑlÉ MawdËdÊ, The Islamic Law and Constitution, translated and edited by Khurshid Ahmad, (Lahore: Islamic Publications Ltd, 1983), 76.[3] SharÊÑah refers to the sum total of Islamic laws and guidance, which were revealed to the Prophet MuÍammad (peace be upon him), and which are recorded in the Qur’Én as well as deducible from the Prophet’s divinely guided lifestyle (called the Sunnah). See Muhammad ShalabÊ, al-Madkhal fÊ at-TaÑ’rÊf  b alil-Fiqh al-IslÉmÊ, (Beirut: n.p., 1968),.28.[4]Sunnah is the way of life of the Prophet (peace be upon him), consisting of his sayings, actions and silent approvals. It is also used to mean a recommended deed as opposed to FarÌ or WÉjib, a compulsory one.[5]  Originally Fiqh referred to deliberations related to one’s reasoned opinion, ra’y.  Later the expression Fiqh evolved to mean jurisprudence covering every aspect of Islam.  It is also applied to denote understanding, comprehension, and profound knowledge. For an excellent exposition on the meaning of Fiqh, see Imran Ahsan Khan Nyazee, Theories of Islamic law: The methodology of ijtihÉd, (Delhi: Adam Publishers & Distributors, 1996), 20-22.


Author(s):  
Sayyid Mohammad Yunus Gilani ◽  
K. M. Zakir Hossain Shalim

AbstractForensic evidence is an evolving science in the field of criminal investigation and prosecutions. It has been widely used in the administration of justice in the courts and the Western legal system, particularly in common law. To accommodate this new method of evidence in Islamic law, this article firstly, conceptualizes forensic evidence in Islamic law.  Secondly, explores legal frameworks for its adoption in Islamic law. Keywords: Forensic Evidence, legal framework, Criminal Investigation, Sharīʿah.AbstrakBukti forensik adalah sains yang sentiasa berkembang dalam bidang siasatan jenayah dan pendakwaan. Ia telah digunakan secara meluas dalam pentadbiran keadilan di mahkamah dan sistem undang-undang Barat, terutamanya dalam undang-undang common (common law). Untuk menampung kaedah pembuktian baru ini dalam undang-undang Islam, artikel ini, pertamanya, konseptualisasikan bukti forensik dalam undang-undang Islam. Kedua, ia menerokai rangka kerja undang-undang untuk penerimaannya dalam undang-undang Islam.Kata Kunci: Bukti Forensik, Rangka Kerja Guaman, Siasatan Jenayah, Sharīʿah.


Numen ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Dale

AbstractThe idea that there were different points of view in seventeenth century Massachusetts Bay is not a new one. Several recent studies have undermined Perry Miller's monolithic “Puritan Mind”—demonstrating there were many strands of thought even among the nominally orthodox, and suggesting that we think of the settlers in New England as members of a movement with many ideas, rather than holders of a single point of view.While the idea that there were divisions within the category of Puritan is not a new one, the extent to which that ideological pluralism had a practical impact on the Bay colony's institutions, from its families to its governing system, has not yet been explored. This paper is a preliminary effort to demonstrate how ideological pluralism led to different conceptions of law, and had a practical effect on the legal system developed in the first generation of settlement in Massachusetts Bay.


Author(s):  
Yanina Karpenkina

Abstract In 1939–1941, the Soviet policy in the new western borderlands was based on the need to transform quickly the annexed territories into a safe and invulnerable border. Thus, having expanded its territories to the west in 1939–1940, the Soviet government was in no hurry to eliminate the old border outposts. On the contrary, the previously existing Polish-Soviet border was preserved in the form of so-called “barrier zone” (« зона заграждения »), and special permits were still required to cross it. At the same time, the construction of new western borders was proceeding at an accelerated pace, and in parallel with this, a massive “purge” of the population of the new regions was carried out. Thus, in the pre-war years, the annexed territories were assigned the role of a kind of broad “buffer zone” that was supposed to protect the USSR from the west with two border lines—the new German-Soviet border (external) and the preserved former Polish-Soviet border (internal).


2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 62-70
Author(s):  
N. Yu. Cherepenina ◽  
A. L. Dmitriev

The activity of state statistics throughout the revolutionary period of 1917 is uncharted territory in the history of Russian statistics. Using documents from the State Archive of the Russian Federation, the authors examined for the first time the last year of the Central Statistical Committee. Unlike other state structures of the previous government, it was not dissolved after the events of October 1917 and continued to operate after the Soviet government moved to Moscow. The article contains information on the first «Soviet» Head of the Central Statistical Committee of the Commissariat of Internal Affairs V.A. Algasov and outlines the work of Professor M.A. Sirinov, who was offered a position of the Head of the Central Statistical Committee by the People’s Commissar of Internal Affairs G.I. Petrovsky. Archive records helped establish the fact that both the authorities of the Central Statistical Committee and some statisticians came up with an idea of founding a new statistical service based on the Central Statistical Committee and gubernia (provincial) statistics. The authors revealed the role of V.V. Stepanov in relocating the Library of the Central Statistical Committee to Moscow. The article describes the clash of opinions that preceded the establishment of the Soviet state statistics, to be specific the inauguration of the RSFSR Central Statistical Board, which was envisaged to be an independent body, not subordinate to any agency, to ensure the independence of the country’s statistical service. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document