What countries apply Sharia law as their primary legal system and how do their codes differ?
Executive summary
A small number of states today treat sharia-law-implementation">Islamic law (sharia) as the primary or sole source of national law, while most Muslim-majority countries use sharia selectively or alongside secular codes; the result is a wide spectrum of legal regimes rather than a single model [1] [2]. Those differences stem from divergent sectarian jurisprudence, constitutional designs, and choices about whether sharia governs family matters, criminal law, finance, or the entire legal order [3] [1].
1. What “primary legal system” means and how scholars classify regimes
Scholars and policy watchers divide countries into three broad types: states where sharia is the primary or sole legal framework for most matters, states that incorporate sharia into particular domains (usually family law and personal status), and mixed systems where civil codes predominate but sharia influences some laws or parallel Islamic courts exist [1] [3]. Those categorizations reflect constitutional texts, statutory codes, the role of religious courts, and the practical reach of clerical institutions rather than a single checklist [1] [4].
2. Countries that treat sharia as the primary or sole legal foundation
Saudi Arabia and the Islamic Republic of Iran are prominent examples widely described as operating with sharia as the dominant legal source: Saudi courts use classical sharia jurisprudence under the Hanbali tradition and the king has final legal authority, while Iran’s post‑1979 constitutional order embeds sharia within a civil‑law framework overseen by clerical institutions [4] [5]. Taliban‑ruled Afghanistan since 2021 enforces a strict, conservative version of sharia as the governing law across criminal and civil matters according to multiple summaries [2] [6]. Reports and compilations also name Sudan and several other states as adopting extensive sharia-based criminal or public law measures, though precise scope varies [7] [2].
3. Hybrid and parallel systems: common patterns and notable examples
Most Muslim‑majority states fall into hybrid categories: they retain secular civil codes for commerce and much public law while applying sharia to family law for Muslims, or operate dual court tracks where religious courts handle personal status cases for believers [1] [4]. Malaysia and Indonesia illustrate this approach: Malaysia runs parallel civil and sharia courts for Muslims, and Indonesia applies sharia criminal law only in Aceh province while the national system remains predominantly civil [5] [7]. Morocco and Egypt treat sharia as a primary source for particular areas but maintain largely civil‑law judicial structures influenced historically by European codes [8] [4].
4. The legal mechanics: how sharia-based codes differ across countries
Differences arise from (a) which classical school or sectarian tradition dominates (Sunni madhhabs vs. Jafari/Shia interpretations), (b) whether sharia is implemented via codified statutes or judge-made fiqh, and (c) whether criminal hudud punishments are retained, modified, or rejected—leading to divergent penalties and procedures [3] [1]. Some states have codified sharia‑derived provisions into modern penal codes (examples cited in comparative surveys), while others confine sharia to family law or banking rules, producing sharply different lived legal outcomes [8] [2].
5. Enforcement, human‑rights concerns, and contested narratives
Observers stress that application matters as much as text: countries that centrally enforce hudud or male‑guardianship rules draw repeated human‑rights criticism, including documented concerns about corporal punishments and gendered restrictions in places such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, and Amnesty has singled out harsh practices in some sharia‑based systems [5] [9]. At the same time, international surveys and experts emphasize that many states reference sharia without endorsing extreme punishments, and public opinion about making sharia the law of the land varies widely across regions [1] [10].
6. Bottom line: complexity, variation, and limits of the record
The term “sharia law country” conceals vast legal diversity: a handful of states rely on sharia as the core legal system, many more use it selectively or in parallel institutions, and the practical effects depend on codification choices, sectarian law schools, and political control of courts [2] [1] [3]. Reporting and databases often list overlapping sets of countries but differ on thresholds and categories; the sources consulted here document patterns and examples but cannot exhaustively map every national code or recent reform [8] [11].