Question

Salam, I wanted to know who can do khula in the uk. For example there are sharia services that give khula to the woman, but i want to ask what is the legitimacy of such institutions here in the uk, who has given them the right to terminate someones marriage. If the husband does not agree and does not give them consent and they do not follow the correct Quranic procedure of a khula how can this mufti or maulana or shaykh issue a khula. Is there any weight to his doing so and if the woman gets married is her nikah even valid. I ask there are many cases where woman have got khula done from such places and the husbands have been left with no knowledge of anything other than knowing there assets have been taken away. Can you please shed some light on this issue. JazakAllah

Answer

An Islamic court serves a vital function in the operation of the Shariʿa. This is because various areas of personal law depend on a ruling from an Islamic judge. Muslims living in non-Muslim dominated areas have no recourse to an Islamic court, and a non-Muslim court does not have the jurisdiction to rule in these religious affairs.

In such spaces, the fiqh offers the solution of the jamaʿat al-muslimin – a council of Muslims that convene on such judicial issues, acting as an Islamic court in locations with no Muslim legal jurisdiction. In the West, these are often called Shariʿa councils, which are in fact Shariʿa arbitration panels. As previously stated, their jurisdiction is focused on matters of personal law: marriage, divorce, dispute arbitration, and possibly inheritance. Their authority comes from the community themselves, and their judgements are binding.[1]

We know that some Shariʿa councils’ due diligence processes are stricter and more in line with the Hanafi school. However, if the processes used are within the boundaries of the four madhhabs, the judgement is valid and binding. This is because of the legal maxim “an ijtihad cannot be overturned by another ijtihad”.[2] If there is a valid difference of opinion in a matter, citing the other opinion cannot overturn the first judgement.

Even if one disputes a judgement, they have no recourse. How can you bring back a wife who has a certificate authorised by a religious body that their marriage has been annulled?

As for assets being taken away, this does not appear legitimate as Islamic divorces do not entail such wealth transfers. This is likely incurred as outstanding mahr; otherwise, we are unsure how this was justified.

[1]              الشرح الكبير للشيخ الدردير وحاشية الدسوقي (2/ 519)اعْلَمْ أَنَّ جَمَاعَةَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ الْعُدُولِ يَقُومُونَ مَقَامَ الْحَاكِمِ فِي ذَلِكَ وَفِي كُلِّ أَمْرٍ يَتَعَذَّرُ الْوُصُولُ فِيهِ إلَى الْحَاكِمِ أَوْ لِكَوْنِهِ غَيْرَ عَدْلٍ اهـ خش وَالْوَاحِدُ مِنْهُمْ كَافٍ كَمَا قَالَهُ شَيْخُنَا تَبَعًا لعبق فِيمَا مَرَّ وَنَازَعَ فِيهِ بْن كَمَا تَقَدَّمَ فَانْظُرْهُ

«حاشية ابن عابدين = رد المحتار ط الحلبي» (5/ 369):مَطْلَبٌ فِي ‌حُكْمِ ‌تَوْلِيَةِ الْقَضَاءِ فِي بِلَادٍ تَغَلَّبَ عَلَيْهَا الْكُفَّارُ وَفِي الْفَتْحِ: وَإِذَا لَمْ يَكُنْ سُلْطَانٌ، وَلَا مَنْ يَجُوزُ التَّقَلُّدُ مِنْهُ كَمَا هُوَ فِي بَعْضِ بِلَادِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ غَلَبَ عَلَيْهِمْ الْكُفَّارُ كَقُرْطُبَةَ الْآنَ يَجِبُ عَلَى الْمُسْلِمِينَ أَنْ يَتَّفِقُوا عَلَى وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمْ، وَيَجْعَلُونَهُ وَالِيًا فَيُوَلَّى قَاضِيًا وَيَكُونُ هُوَ الَّذِي يَقْضِي بَيْنَهُمْ وَكَذَا يُنَصِّبُوا إمَامًا يُصَلِّي بِهِمْ الْجُمُعَةَ اهـ. وَهَذَا هُوَ الَّذِي تَطْمَئِنُّ النَّفْسُ إلَيْهِ فَلْيُعْتَمَدْ نَهْرٌ، وَالْإِشَارَةُ بِقَوْلِهِ: وَهَذَا إلَى مَا أَفَادَهُ كَلَامُ الْفَتْحِ مِنْ عَدَمِ صِحَّةِ تَقَلُّدِ الْقَضَاءِ مِنْ كَافِرٍ عَلَى خِلَافِ مَا مَرَّ عَنْ التَّتَارْخَانِيَّة، وَلَكِنْ إذَا وَلَّى الْكَافِرُ عَلَيْهِمْ قَاضِيًا وَرَضِيَهُ الْمُسْلِمُونَ صَحَّتْ تَوْلِيَتُهُ بِلَا شُبْهَةٍ تَأَمَّلْ، ثُمَّ إنَّ الظَّاهِرَ أَنَّ الْبِلَادَ الَّتِي لَيْسَتْ تَحْتَ حُكْمِ سُلْطَانٍ بَلْ لَهُمْ أَمِيرٌ مِنْهُمْ مُسْتَقِلٌّ بِالْحُكْمِ عَلَيْهِمْ بِالتَّغَلُّبِ أَوْ بِاتِّفَاقِهِمْ عَلَيْهِ يَكُونُ ذَلِكَ الْأَمِيرُ فِي حُكْمِ السُّلْطَانِ فَيَصِحُّ مِنْهُ تَوْلِيَةُ الْقَاضِي عَلَيْهِمْ»

Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanawi, al-Hilat al-Najiza, (Deoband: Maktaba-i Radi)

Mufti Taqi Uthmani, Buhuth fi Qadhaya Fiqhiyya Mu’asira (Karachi: Makatabat Darul Uloom Karachi): 173-183.

[2]              موسوعة القواعد الفقهية» (8/ 1098): ‌لا ‌ينقض ‌الاجتهاد بالاجتهاد – أو بمثله (1). ثانياً: معنى هذه القاعدة ومدلولها

إذا اجتهد مجتهد في حكم مسألة من المسائل الشّرعيّة الاجتهاديّة – غير النَّصِّيّة – وعمل باجتهاده فيها، ثم بان له رأي آخر في مسألة أخرى مشابهة، فلا يجوز أن ينقض اجتهاده الأوّل باجتهاده الثّاني، كما لا يجوز لغيره أن ينقض اجتهاده في مسألة صدر له فيها رأي. والعلّة في ذلك: أنّ الاجتهاد الثّاني ليس بأقوى من الأوّل، وأنّه يؤدّي إلى أن لا يستقرّ حكم.

«الوجيز في إيضاح قواعد الفقة الكلية» (ص384): قاعدة: (الاجتهاد لا ينقض بمثله أو بالاجتهاد)

أصل هذه القاعدة في قواعد الإمام الكرخي: (‌الأصل ‌أنه ‌إذا ‌مضي ‌بالاجتهاد ‌لا ‌يفسخ ‌باجتهاد ‌مثله ‌ويفسخ ‌بالنص)»

Answered by:
Maulana Ikramul Hoque Miah

Checked & Approved by:
Mufti Abdul Rahman Mangera
Mufti Zubair Patel