Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
How do Saudi Arabia and Morocco differ in applying Sharia to family law?
Executive summary
Saudi Arabia historically applied uncodified Hanbali-based Sharia across family, criminal and civil matters, giving judges wide discretion until a 2022 Personal Status Law (PSL) began to codify family rules and limit arbitrariness [1] [2]. Morocco, by contrast, is not in your search results; available sources do not mention Morocco’s family-law approach, so direct comparison on specifics of Moroccan law is not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).
1. How Saudi family law has been applied: from judge-driven Sharia to codification
For decades Saudi family matters were decided by Sharia courts whose judges interpreted Hanbali fiqh and classical texts on a case‑by‑case basis, producing variable rulings because there was little codified family law; that judicial discretion (ijtihad) shaped outcomes for marriage, divorce, custody and inheritance [1] [3]. Human-rights groups and scholars argued this uncodified system created unpredictability and gendered disadvantages for women, prompting reform pressure that culminated in the Personal Status Law (PSL) enacted in 2022 to codify family rules, reduce judicial discretion, and make outcomes more consistent and accessible [2] [4].
2. What the 2022 Personal Status Law changed — and what it didn’t
The PSL, effective June 18, 2022, was presented as a modernising step: it codifies principles that previously were left to judges, aims to curtail discretionary rulings, and is said to improve certain women’s rights and legal predictability [2]. Reporting indicates codification was intended to make family rules public and reduce inconsistent case‑by‑case application that had disadvantaged litigants, especially women [2]. Available sources do not provide a full list of PSL provisions in these excerpts; they note the law’s purpose and some impacts but stop short of itemising all substantive changes [2].
3. Child custody trends: judicial practice versus classical prescriptions
Saudi judges historically exercised discretion that sometimes departed from classical age limits for maternal custody: long before the PSL, courts often prioritised the "best interests of the child" and granted mothers custody beyond traditionally prescribed ages (e.g., older than classical 7 for boys and 9 for girls), demonstrating how practice could soften strict doctrinal rules [4]. This shows that uncodified Sharia application allowed judge‑led adaptations even before codification [4].
4. Gendered effects and criticisms under Saudi practice
Several sources document that, under Saudi interpretations of Sharia, family law tended to favour men in matters like divorce and guardianship, and that women faced practical and legal constraints — for example, requirements around marriage permissions, difficulties proving grounds for divorce, and claims that some victims of sexual violence faced criminalisation for related moral charges [5] [6] [7]. Human‑rights reporting and legal commentators linked these outcomes to both substantive law and the prior lack of codification that gave judges wide latitude [6] [2].
5. The legal architecture: Hanbali school, state religion and institutional control
Saudi Arabia’s system is rooted in Hanbali jurisprudence and an official fusion of state and religious authority: the Basic Law and court practice emphasise Sharia as the primary source of law, appellate review focuses on Sharia compliance, and the Supreme Judicial Council and the King play central roles in supervision and legal policymaking [1] [3]. Analysts point to a combination of uncodified doctrine and executive oversight that shaped how family law was applied in practice [1].
6. Limits of the available reporting and what’s missing
Your search results include detailed reporting about Saudi Arabia’s family‑law evolution and reforms (PSL), but they do not include reporting on Morocco’s family law (e.g., Morocco’s Mudawana reforms) in these excerpts. Therefore direct, source‑backed contrasts between Saudi and Moroccan application of Sharia to family law cannot be made from the supplied materials — any claims about Morocco would go beyond the provided sources (not found in current reporting).
7. How to get a verifiable comparison
To produce a balanced country‑by‑country comparison you should consult sources on Morocco’s family code (the Mudawana and its reform history) and independent analyses comparing Moroccan codification and gender provisions to Saudi Arabia’s PSL and Hanbali court practice. Those Morocco materials are not in the supplied set; once provided, I can create a side‑by‑side, source‑cited comparison (not found in current reporting).
Sources cited: Saudi codification, judicial practice, and critiques: [2] [1] [3] [4] [6] [5] [7].