No abstract

This article examines how the inclusion or exclusion of Islamic law and Muslimbased customary law affects de facto or de lege universal human rights. The view adopted is that there is an Islamic form of constitutionalism that should respect Islam, Shari'a law and Muslim customary law. The author therefore suggests a different approach to constitution-making than the transnational constitutional theory and secular theories, looking at the interaction between sources of law and the role for legal pluralism. The originality of the article is to be found in the demonstration that Islamic constitutionalism is not a threat to transnational constitutionalism, or a competitor, but an alternative. The argument is that a constitutional inclusion of Islamic law and Muslim-based customary law is possible if the authoritative sources of Islam are interpreted in the light of the new hermeneutics of Shari'a law. Islamic law and Shari'a-based customary law need to be reformed, taking international human rights law as a yardstick. This approach to interpretation can then promote a more human-rights oriented reading of Islamic legal sources. The aim is to ensure that the Constitution is legitimate in the eyes of all while ensuring that legal pluralism does not undermine State law and violate universal human rights.

No abstract

This paper challenges the idea that contextualisation of humanitarian aid affects the principle of universality of human rights as well as the principles of neutrality and impartiality. It seeks to demonstrate that contextualisation will not only improve access, delivery and protection: contextualising a mission also enables aid workers to respect the local context without impacting universal human rights negatively. The author argues that impacting the societies in which aid is delivered is inevitable. The key then becomes to avoid endorsing indirect cultural relativism. This is why the article puts forward the idea of creating a yardstick or a test that would help deciding which beliefs and values are to be included when considering the context, and which ones should be excluded. The process of selection of values and beliefs is to be operated by an empowered local population. The filter suggested in the case at hand is the Muslim legal instrument of maslaha that protects the public interest. The use of this filter can only be efficient if Islamic authoritative sources are interpreted differently, in a reformist fashion, to try and match universal human rights law. This is possible through the Muslim theories advocating for change. Muslim beneficiaries who are vulnerable after a disaster or during a conflict provide an opportunity to test the filter of maslaha, looking at how an empowered community can change and influence aid agencies' agenda.