Human rights in Shari'a and Iran's constitutional and legal system : the case of freedom of expression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis advances a theoretical framework for the evaluation of Shari'a (Islamic law) with respect to the modern notion of international human rights law. It analyzes the concepts of individual, rights, citizenry, and constitutionalism in Shari'a, and examines the principles, characteristics, and standards of Shari'a in the field of human rights. With reference to the principle of equality, it also reviews the rights of women and religious minorities under Shari'a. As a case study, the thesis also establishes a framework for analyzing the notions of freedom and freedom of expression, and discusses Shari'a criteria and qualifications for freedom of speech, the right to participate in public life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom of the press. Focusing on Iran's constitutional and legal system, the study illustrates the implementation of Islamic law in Iran, where Shari'a is strictly applied. The thesis concludes that universal standards of human rights are not established features in Islamic law, and Shari'a principles contradict the principles and norms of international human rights law. It is also argued that the application of Shari'a, public and criminal law in particular, is problematic and results in deficiencies and hardships in Muslim societies. Muslim reformists have sought an alternative Islamic law more compatible with modern standards and values. This thesis contributes to the debate on Islamic reformism and human rights in arguing that Shari'a's contradiction of universal human rights norms cannot be avoided, and that traditional mechanisms of reforrn within the framework of Shari'a are inadequate for achieving the necessary degree of reform. It is suggested that, based on a cross-cultural dialogue and intellectual debate, an essential and primary reform should define the notion of human rights on rational and intellectual grounds, and identify the objective foundations of human rights in reason and human dignity, not on Shari'a criteria and qualifications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.065 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".