Rahman 1
Fatima Z. Rahman
University of California, Irvine
Department of Political Science
Center for the Study of Democracy
Political Islam and Gender: The Impact upon Democracy
This paper empirically tests the purported negative effect of Shari’a upon the institutionalization
of gender equality through a cross-national assessment of the fifty one Muslim majority states.
By doing so, this paper not only sheds light on the specific relationship between Shari’a and
gender equality but more broadly provides a better understanding of the implications of state
endorsement of political Islam on liberal democracy in the region. The paper finds that states
with higher levels of integration of Shari’a based laws in their family legal code have lower
levels of institutionalized gender equality as compared to states with lower levels of Shari’a
inclusion.
Rahman 2
According to the most current Freedom House statistics, only two of the fifty one Muslim
majority states are free,1 representing only 2.2% of the eighty-nine free states in the world as of
2008. This continuing trend of democratic deficiency in the Islamic world has fueled the debate
regarding the fundamental causes of the democratic gap in the region. At the forefront of the
debate is the perspective that the state’s endorsement of political Islam, as characterized by the
adoption of Shari’a in the legal system, inhibits the development of democracy. Proponents
argue this obstacle to democratization is due to fundamental characteristics of Shari’a which
make it irreconcilable with liberal democracy, most prominently its violation of women’s rights.
This paper empirically tests the purported negative effect of Shari’a upon the
institutionalization of gender equality through a cross-national assessment. By doing so, this
paper not only sheds light on the specific relationship between Shari’a and gender equality but
more broadly provides a better understanding of the implications of state endorsement of
political Islam on liberal democracy in the region.
The paper will begin with an explanation of the perspective that state sponsored political
Islam is incompatible with liberal democracy, discussing the four characteristics of Shari’a that
scholars argue impede liberal democratization in Muslim majority states. I will then focus more
narrowly on one of the four characteristics of Shari’a which purportedly impedes
democratization, namely the violation of gender equality. The paper will then discuss why
gender equality is considered a fundamental component of liberal democracy and how its
deficiency in Muslim majority states inhibits democratization. Next, I will discuss my
measurement of political Islam and motivate my model. Lastly, I will discuss the findings and
implications.
1
“A Free country is one where there is broad scope for open political competition, a climate of respect for civil
liberties, significant independent civic life, and independent media.” (Puddington 2009, 2)
Rahman 3
Incompatibility between State Sponsored Political Islam and Liberal Democracy
The argument that the state endorsement of political Islam impedes democracy is based
on four core characteristics of Shari’a which are deemed incompatible with liberal democracy.
Firstly, scholars argue that the implementation of Shari’a as the state legal system necessitates a
merging of religion and politics which contradicts the assumption of secularism. They claim that
the establishment of religious mandates as the basis of rules and principles that govern society
violates the separation of Church and State (Huntington 1984). Secondly, the state’s
endorsement of Shari’a contradicts the principle of ultimate sovereignty in the people by placing
that sovereignty in God (Addi 1992; Kedourie1994; Ehteshami and Sidahmed 1996; Lewis 1996,
Abukhalil 1997). Because the fundamental laws of Shari’a are considered unalterable, there is a
portion of the legal system which is off limits for the people. Furthermore and thirdly, any
power of interpretation belongs to non-elected Ulema or Islamic legal scholars. Proponents point
out that the interpretation of Islam in the realm of law is denied to individuals because of the
closing of the gates of “Ijtihad” over 1200 years ago (Price 1999, 161). Lastly and most
primarily, critics argue that Shari’a is detrimental to the basic human rights of women which are
guaranteed in liberal democracy (Fukuyama 1992; Ziai 1997; Moghadam 2004; Barlow 2008).
Sharia’s Violation of Women’s Rights and Obstruction of Gender Equality
Shari’a is criticized particularly for its violation of women’s rights and the rights of nonMuslims (Mayer 1991). Non-Muslim minorities are given an inferior set of political rights and
civil liberties. For example, there are legal limitations on the pursuit of political and military
careers for non-Muslims. With the exception of Jews and Christians, minorities are not granted
the right to follow an alternative legal system (Mayer 1991, 157). However, a broad empirical
Rahman 4
study by Price finds that an Islamic political culture is not linked to violation of personal
integrity rights, nor is it associated negatively with civil liberties (Price 1999, 168-173).
Women similarly are denied equal status to that of men. The inequality is evident
throughout the different areas of law, but especially in the family and criminal codes. Most
notably under family law, women are restricted from full marriage rights while divorce, custody,
and inheritance laws favor men. Under penal law, they are subject to punishments for premarital
sex, adultery, and failure to dress modestly which according to liberal democratic standards are
not only considered inhumane but also as violating the right to privacy and the freedom of
religion. Moghadam writes, “Current interpretations of Islamic theology and law emphasize
women’s roles as wives and mothers, and render them legal minors and dependents of husbands
or male kin (Moghadam 2004, 100).
The Harmful Effect of Shari’a Upon Women’s Rights: The Causes
The viewpoint that Shari’a is detrimental to women’s rights and is therefore
fundamentally at odds with liberal democracy is based upon three basic grounds.
Firstly, scholars argue that it is the philosophical foundation of Shari’a which deems it
problematic for gender equality. Critics argue that Shari’a is based upon a communal rights’
system rather than an individual rights’ system of liberal democracy (Barlow 2008, 43). The
emphasis upon community is a fundamental value in Islam, and dictates the resulting legal
system. The logic behind a community based society is that the good of the community takes
precedence over the good of any one individual. In an attempt to attain an ideal Islamic society,
individuals serve different roles in society, with varying responsibilities. As a consequence, the
laws that govern these individuals are also different reflecting their responsibilities to the
community. This explains the complementarity foundation of Shari’a as opposed to an equality
Rahman 5
based foundation as found in the UNDHR and other human rights’ schemes in liberal
democracies (Ziai 1997, 72-73). The complementarity foundation renders different treatment of
men and women under the law, reflecting their unequal but complementing roles in society and
family. This different treatment becomes evident in laws pertaining to inheritance, marriage,
divorce, and child custody in which women are discriminated against according to the liberal
democratic conception of human rights.
Along with the complementarity foundation of Shari’a as opposed to the individualist
foundation of Western legal systems, scholars, especially Islamic feminists, claim that the gender
based discriminatory laws are the consequence of non-Islamic traditions which were
incorporated into Shari’a during its long evolution from the early eighth to the eighteenth century
(Barlow 2008, 44, 47; Shaheed 2004,7; Rahman 1983). Proponents argue that it was Islam’s
exposure to multiple cultures along with customs predating Islam’s arrival that became
established parts of Shari’a. Islamic feminists argue that the divine sources of Islam such as the
Quran and sunna (practices of Prophet Muhammad) support equitable treatment of women and
contradict many of the laws set forth by Shari’a (Mayer 2007, 113; Rahman 1983).
Thirdly, scholars argue that Shari’a is detrimental to women because of the inherent male
bias of the legal scholars who created it. Over its long evolution, Shari’a has continued to be the
domain of men. Thus, critics argue that the gendered structure reflects the desire of these men to
maintain patriarchical value systems (Afshar 1996 199; Barlow 2008, 47). This effect is
deepened by the severe patriarchical system of the Medieval period from which Shari’a stems.
The interpretations are not only strictly based upon male perspectives, but perspectives
developed during “pre-modern” times when society, especially gender roles functioned very
differently (Mayer 2007, 113).
Rahman 6
The Fundamental Necessity of Gender Equality for Liberal Democracy and the Lack of it
in Islamic states
Prior theoretical and empirical studies have argued that the inequitable gender structure
underlying many Islamic states impedes the establishment of liberal democracy. Steven Fish
posits that the dominant presence of patriarchalism impedes Islamic states from hosting
democratic regimes (Fish 2002, 24). He supports his claim through empirical tests which show
that Islamic states have a significantly larger gender gap in literacy rates than non-Islamic states,
a higher sex ratio, lower female participation in governmental agencies as well as lower status in
the workplace. All these factors are significantly correlated with lower democracy scores even
when the effect of Islam and economic development are controlled (Fish 2002). Following
Fish’s study on authoritarianism in Islamic states, Donno and Russet confirm that Islamic
countries are more likely to suppress women’s rights than other countries, and find that this
relationship is especially strong for Arab states (Donno and Russet 2004, 582-583).
Similarly survey data and political culture studies consistently find that attitudes of
gender equality are required for democratic culture and that the populations of the Islamic world
lack these attitudes (Inglehart and Norris 2003; Jamal 2006). IPE explanations utilize a similar
logic, attributing the political, social, and economic marginalization of women as a fundamental
impediment to democratization in the Islamic world (Moghadam 2004).
While theoretical and case studies of Shari’a and its effect upon women’s rights are
prevalent in both academic and policy literature, the relationship has not been examined crossnationally. And while the effect of being a state with a majority of Muslims has been crossnationally tested upon women’s rights and democracy (Fish 2002; Donno and Russet 2004), the
specific effect of political Islam has not been tested. This paper examines the relationship
Rahman 7
between Shari’a based legal code and conventional measures of gender equality across the fiftyone Muslim majority states2.
Measuring Political Islam:
There is consensus that political Islam or Islamism is a political ideology, but beyond that
it is a widely disputed concept with competing definitions and varied interpretations. The core
commonality amongst the definitions offered is the ideology’s commitment to Shari’a or Islamic
law. The conception used in this paper is that of Schwedler who defines political Islam as a
political ideology that, “captures at most a shared commitment to the implementation of Islamic
Law (Shari’a) in all spheres…” (2006, 8). Because of the emphasis upon an Islamic legal system
as the defining characteristic of political Islam, this paper measures a state’s endorsement of
political Islam as the degree to which a state’s legal code integrates the laws set forth by Shari’a.
Specifically, this paper focuses upon a state’s personal status law or more familiarly
family law as used in Western legal thought. Family law is chosen for a single primary reason.
Shari’a based laws that are integrated into the family law sector are both de jure and de facto.
This cannot be said of Shari’a based criminal or penal laws which are often formally a part of the
criminal law sector but are in actuality not practiced. Therefore, the extent to which Shari’a is
integrated into family law reflects a state’s commitment to actualizing Islam as a guide for
shaping politics and governing society. It therefore better captures a state’s endorsement of
political Islam than an assessment of the criminal law sector.
The two issues areas used to measure the degree to which a state integrates Shari’a into
family law are divorce and custody law. Each state receives a score of 1, 2, or 3 for each issue
2
Muslim Majority state refers to a state in which the majority of the citizenry belongs to the Islamic faith as opposed
to any other religion.
Rahman 8
area. The two scores are then indexed3 into a single continuous variable measuring the degree of
incorporation of Shari’a based laws in the state’s family legal code. The coding scheme4 is as
follows:
Divorce Law:
1= Woman has right to file for divorce on all grounds including irreconcilable differences or
incompatibility
2=Woman has right to file for divorce on all grounds including irreconcilable differences or
incompatibility but she must provide some monetary compensation to husband for release from
marriage (the concept of khul)
3= Woman has right to file for divorce on limited grounds only, excluding irreconcilable
differences or incompatibility.
Custody Law:
1= Custody of child is determined in accordance with the best interests of the child.
2= Custody of child is given to the mother until the ages between 2 and 15 but the court holds
discretion to extend the time period and/or take the opinion of child into consideration.
3= Custody of child is given to the mother until the ages between 2 and 15 only.
A score of 1 in either category reflects virtually no adherence to or integration of Shari’a
in the respective category. A score of 2 in either category reflects some adherence and some
integration of Shari’a in each respective category, but it is reformed to some degree. A score of
3 in either category reflects the highest level of integration of Shari’a in each respective category,
representing a strict adherence to Shari’a law. The two scores for each state are added and
divided by two, resulting in an index variable ranging between 1 and 3 in which 1 represents a
state with a Shari’a free family law sector and a 3 represents a state with a fully Shari’a
compliant family law sector.
Cronbach’s Alpha was used to verify that the two variables are measuring the same underlying concept. A Scale
reliability coefficient of .9005 was obtained, verifying that the two variables may be combined.
4
The coding was derived from analysis of various secondary resources including the “Islamic Family Law” project
conducted by Law and Religion Program at Emory University, the “Islamic Information Resource” conducted by
the Reunite International Research Unit, the “‘Best Practices’ Progressive Family Laws in Muslim Countries
August 2005” report conducted by the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the Rand
Corporation, “The World Factbook” by the CIA, and various other resources on the laws and legal traditions of
specific states.
3
Rahman 9
Hypothesis 1: States with a family law sector exhibiting greater levels of integration of Shari’a
based laws are more likely to have lower levels of institutionalized gender equality.
Figure 1
30
Distribution of Shari'a Levels
Percentage of
States
25.00%
4.17%
16.67%
22.92%
31.25%
0
10
20
Degree of
Integration of
Shari’a in the
Family Legal
Code
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Degree of Integration of Shari'a in the Family Legal Code
Competing Explanations of Gender Equality
A series of rival hypotheses that seek to explain gender equality will also be tested and
included in the model.
The model includes a measure for the state’s level of economic development. This is
measured by GNI per capita5. This variable captures the widely supported argument that
economic development is necessary for gender equity. Many scholars argue that it is the
deficient economic profiles of Muslim majority states that produce gender inequality. Thirty
nine out of forty-six Muslim majority countries are in the least developed or developing
categories (Hunter 2005). Proponents suggest that it is the lack of investment flows and low
levels of industrialization that are at the root of the problem, producing a gender gap in the labor
force, unemployment, and illiteracy that are responsible for the lack of women’s rights in the
region. (Hunter 2005, 1-3; Moghadam 2005). Other proponents claim that economic
5
The data is taken from the World Bank and is from 2007.
Rahman 10
development renders equality in gender roles because women enter the workforce and become
literate. This brings about a change in gender roles, changing societal attitudes toward gender
equality (Inglehart and Welzel 2005).
H2: States with higher GNI per capita are more likely have higher levels of institutionalized
gender equality.
Others argue that oil economies impede the full equality of women. Ross posits that
growth by resource extraction lies at the root of inequitable gender status in the Middle East. He
argues that oil production discourages the inclusion of women in the labor force which
consequently silences their voice in the political arena. “As a result, oil-producing states are left
with atypically strong patriarchal norms, laws, and political institutions” (Ross 2008). To
account for this argument, the model includes a measure of whether a state is an oil economy or
not. This is a dichotomous variable, measuring whether the state is a member of the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC).
H3: States with a largely oil based economy are more likely have lower levels of institutionalized
gender equality.
Historical institutionalists claim that it is the state’s colonial or occupied past that
explains why the Islamic world suffers from inadequate human rights guarantees including that
of women. Mitchell and McCormick claim that violation of human rights is related to the
colonial experience of the state because of the political culture that the colonizing power instills
in the state (Mitchell and McCormick 1988). While British colonialism is linked to liberal
democratic principles, including the guarantee of basic personal, political, economic, and social
rights (Poe and Tate and Keith 1999), Soviet occupation is said to hamper the implementation of
democratic values such as basic human rights. To capture the effect of colonization or
Rahman 11
occupation, a state receives a 0 or 1 depending on whether it has a British colonial legacy and a 0
or 1 depending on whether it was a former Soviet successor state.
H4: States that were formally colonized by Britain are more likely to have higher levels of
institutionalized gender equality.
H5: States that are a Soviet successor state are more likely to have lower levels of
institutionalized gender equality.
Some argue that religious or ethnic fragmentation which produces internal conflict and
civil war makes state violations of human rights more likely (Nieburg 1969; Poe and Tate 1994).
Scholars find empirical evidence revealing that civil war has a significant impact on state
repression of human rights (Poe and Tate 1994; Poe and Tate and Keith 1999). The model
includes a measure of the state’s level of ethnic fragmentation. This is a count of the number of
politically active communal groups in the state6
H6: States with a higher level of ethnic fragmentation are more likely to have lower levels of
institutionalized gender equality.
A more regionally focused argument attributes the inferior status of women to Arab
culture rather than to political Islam. Some scholars have argued that the Arab world is
especially resistant to democratic norms such as gender equity when compared to other Islamic
states. Deegan comments that culture must be distinguished from religion, and that Islam is
interpreted differently according to regional cultural influences (Deegan 2005). The Arab
culture in contrast to other regional cultures of the Islamic world is argued to be especially
hostile to women’s rights. Scholars find empirical evidence that Arab states have especially
discouraging records of gender equality. Donno and Russet find that the subordination of women
is particularly severe in the Arab world as compared to other Islamic regions (2004). To account
for this argument in the model, states that are Arab are coded as 1 while all others are coded as 0.
6
This data is taken from the Minorities at Risk dataset, Phase IV (Gurr).
Rahman 12
H6: Arab states are more likely to have lower levels of institutionalized gender equality.
Method
To test the relationship between the degree to which a state’s legal code integrates Shari’a
based laws and the extent to which gender equality is institutionalized, three multiple regression
models and one logistic regression model will be utilized. Conventional measures of gender
equality will be used to measure the level of institutionalized gender equality: female literacy
rate7, percentage of seats held by women in the national parliament8, female labor force
participation rate9, and whether a state’s gender mainstreaming machinery has submitted a
national action plan to the UN to implement the Beijing Platform for Action. The objective of
the Beijing Platform for Action is to attain universal gender equality10.
Table 1. Gender Equality Means across Muslim Majority States
Measures of Gender Equality
Mean
Adult Female Literacy Rate (Percentage)
78.77
Percentage Women in National Parliament
Female Labor Force Participation Rate
9.51
48.04
Submitted
yes
61.7%
Submission of National Action Plan
no
38.3%
Data used for female literacy rates is taken from the United Nation’s Statistics Division, specifically from the
Millennium Development Goals Database. The measure is described as, “Literacy rates of 15-24 years old,
women.” The data is from 2007, which is the most current data available. In cases where 2007 data was not
available, the most recent data available for a particular state was used.
8
Data used for percentage of seats held by women in national parliament is taken from the United Nation’s Statistics
Division, specifically from the Millennium Development Goals Database. The data is from 2007. In cases where
2007 was not available, the latest available data for a particular state was used.
9
Data used for female labor participation rate is taken from the World Bank’s genderstats. The World Bank
describes it as: “Labor force participation rate is the proportion of the population ages 15-64 that is economically
active: all people who supply labor for the production of goods and services during a specified period. International
Labour Organization, Estimates and Projections of the Economically Active Population database.” The data is from
2007. In cases where 2007 data was not available, the latest available data for a particular state was used.
10
Data is derived from an official UN document titled, “Women 2000 and Beyond: Implementation of the Beijing
Platform for Action & Compliance with International Legal Instruments on Women.” The document is produced by
the UN Division for the Advancement of Women.
7
Rahman 13
Results:
Table 2. Institutionalization of Gender Equality as a Function of Shari’a in State Legal Code
Measure of Gender Equality
Female Literacy Rate
(percentage)
Shari’a
Economic
Development
Oil Economy
Ethnic Groups
British Colonization
Former Soviet
Successor State
Arab State
Observations
Adjusted R-squared
Female Labor Force
Participation Rate
(percentage)
-12.60* (5.33)
.0002 (.0003)
Seats held by
Women in National
Parliament
(percentage)
-3.13* (1.49)
-.00004 (.00009)
22.04* (9.48)
.460 (2.04)
15.20 (8.07)
28.57* (10.61)
-4.11 (2.75)
.75 (.50)
-2.46 (2.06)
-3.22 (2.89)
-2.57 (5.71)
-1.84 (1.12)
-10.16* (4.49)
6.25 (6.52)
16.89* (7.85)
44
0.4283
-.25 (1.96)
45
0.3170
-19.57* (4.32)
47
0.4871
.56 (3.23)
.00009 (.00019)
*p<.05, (std. error in parentheses)
Table 3. Institutionalization of Gender Equality as a Function of Shari’a in State Legal Code (con’t.)
Measure of Gender Equality
Shari’a
Economic Development
Oil Economy
Ethnic Groups
British Colonization
Former Soviet Successor State
Arab State
Observations
Submission of national gender
mainstreaming action plan to UN
(Odds Ratio)
.162* (.13)
.11 (.00004)
.26 (.21)
1.36 (.33)
11.97 (14.11)
.09 (.12)
4.70 (4.55)
47
*p<.05, (std. error in parentheses)
Table 4. Predicted Probability of Submission of National Action Plan to UN given Shari’a Level
Degree of Shari’a integration in Family legal
code
1
Predicted Probability of Submission of
National Action Plan to UN
0.9471
1.5
2
2.5
3
0.8780
0.7433
0.5380
0.3190
Rahman 14
Table 2, Table 3, and Table 4 display the results of the four analyses which model four
different measures of gender equality as a function of Shari’a and a series of control variables.
Taken together, the results largely support the hypothesis that states with higher levels of Shari’a
based laws in their family legal code exhibit lower levels of gender equality. Table 2 reveals that
higher levels of Shari’a in the family code are associated with lower female literacy rates.
Comparing two Muslim majority states that are similar in all covariates except for level of
Shari’a integration, the state with a one degree higher level of Shari’a incorporation on a three
point scale is estimated to have a female literacy rate 12.6% lower than the other state.
Similarly, Table 2 reveals that a one degree increase in Shari’a level is associated with an
approximate 3.13% drop in percentage of seats in the national Parliament held by women,
adjusting for all other covariates. Given that the mean of seats held by women for Muslim
majority states is approximately 9.51%, this is a substantial effect.
Table 3 shows the results of the logistic regression which models whether or not a state
has submitted a national action plan of gender mainstreaming to the UN. While a surprising
majority of the states, 61.7% have submitted one, another 38.3% have not (see Table 1). The
analysis reveals that higher levels of Shari’a incorporation are associated with a reduced
likelihood of submitting an action plan. As Table 3 indicates, a state which does not adopt
Shari’a as part of the family legal code is estimated to have a 94.7% probability of submitting a
national action plan. This probability gradually decreases for incremental increases of Shari’a
level. A state with a fully Shari’a compliant family legal code has an estimated probability of
31.9% of submitting a national plan. The outcome is consistent with two of the three other
Rahman 15
models’ results, indicating that a greater amount of Shari’a compliance in the family penal code
has a negative association with the institutionalization of gender equality.
The one measure of gender equality with which Shari’a is not associated is female labor
force participation. This is somewhat surprising given that the rest of the measures support the
negative effect of Shari’a. Much of the IPE literature focuses upon the inequitable labor force
structure, but the evidence suggests that some other factor is responsible for that rather than the
influence of political Islam in the governing structure of the state. Most notably, being an Arab
state is largely related to lower levels of literacy rates. Comparing an Arab and non-Arab state
who are similar on all other factors, the Arab state is estimated to have a 19.57% lower female
literacy rate as compared to the non-Arab state. This supports the prior findings of Donno and
Russet which reveal that the subordination of women is especially worse in Arab states (2004).
Thus the results indicate that patriarchical structures of Arab culture may be the cause of any
inequality in the labor force rather than the influence of political Islam. British colonization is
also negatively associated with female literacy rate, but to a more modest degree.
The level of Shari’a incorporation seems to consistently predict institutionalization of
gender equality, with the exception of female labor force participation; however, some of the
rival hypotheses find support as well although not as consistently. While being an Arab state
seems to play a negative role in female labor force participation, it has a positive effect upon
female literacy. This is a surprising finding because seemingly the same causal logic would
explain the link between being Arab and gender equality in both education and work. However,
specific cultural traditions may shed light on why women’s work but not education is negatively
effected by Arab culture. For example, anecdotally I can suggest that while education for
women is highly valued and seen as a privilege, working is considered a sign of socioeconomic
Rahman 16
inferiority because it assumes financial need. There may be culturally specific norms which
clarify this seemingly counterintuitive dual effect of Arab culture.
Rentier states are more likely to have higher female literacy rates, approximately 22%
greater than a state without an oil-based economy, adjusting for all other factors. This seemingly
contradicts the argument of rentier state scholars such as Ross who argue that growth by resource
extraction is at the heart of gender inequality in the region. However, the positive relationship is
limited to literacy rates only, which may suggest that education specifically may be part of the
generous welfare benefit packages that these states provide to their citizenry to alleviate demand
for democracy. This then would not fully contradict the logic of his argument. Also
contradictory to expectation, former Soviet successor states are estimated to have a 28.57%
higher literacy rate than their non-soviet counterpart. While much of the literature argues that
former Soviet and communist institutions hamper liberal democratic values, the rights of women
may be an exception to this since both women and men were expected to serve an equal function
in communist society.
Conclusion
This paper was motivated by the deficient empirical attention given to the relationship
between state endorsement of political Islam and democracy. Defining state endorsement of
political Islam as the inclusion of Shari’a based laws in the legal code, a series of conventional
measures of gender equality were modeled as a function of Shari’a. In three of the four models,
states with greater levels of inclusion of Shari’a based laws in their family code were estimated
to have substantially lower levels of institutionalized gender equality.
The findings of this paper support the negative relationship between Shari’a and the
institutionalization of gender quality. The paper provides broad empirical backing to the
Rahman 17
perspective that Shari’a is incompatible with liberal democracy because it violates the rights of
women which are guaranteed in liberal democracy. Therefore the evidence suggests that political
Islam impedes liberal democratization in Muslim-majority states because Shari’a, the critical
component of the ideology, inhibits gender equality.
Rahman 18
Works Cited
Abukhalil, Asad. ‘Change and Democratization in the Arab World: The Role of Political
Parties’. Third World Quarterly: Journal of Emerging Areas, Vol.18 No.1 (1997).
Addi, Lahouari. ‘Islamicist Utopia and Democracy’. In The Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science: Political Islam, ed. Charles Butterworth and
William Zartman. London: Sage Publications,1992.
Afshar, Haleh. ‘Islam and Feminism: An Analysis of Political Strategies.’ In Feminism and
Islam, ed. Mai Yamani, 197-216. New York: New York University Press, 1996.
Barlow, Rebecca. ‘Women’s Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran: the Contribution of SecularOriented Feminism.’ In Islam and Human Rights in Practice, ed. Shahram Akbarzadeh
and Benjamin MacQueen, 33-51. New York: Routledge, 2008.
Deegan, Heather. ‘Culture and Development’. In Modernization, Democracy, and Islam, ed.
Shireen T. Hunter and Huma Malik, 21-34. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005.
Donno, Daniela and Bruce Russett. ‘Islam, Authoritarianism, and Female and Empowerment:
What Are the Linkages?’ World Politics, Vol. 56 No. 4 (2004): 582-607.
Ehteshami, Anoushiravan and Abdel Salam Sidahmed. Islamic Fundamentalism. Oxford:
Westview Press, 1996.
Fish, Steven. ‘Islam and Authoritarianism.’ World Politics, Vol. 55 No. 1 (2002): 4-37.
Freedom in the World 2009: Global Data. FreedomHouse. <Freedomhouse.org>
Fukuyama, Francis. The End of History and the Last Man. New York: The Free Press, 1992.
Hunter, Shireen T. ‘Preface’. In Modernization, Democracy, and Islam, ed. Shireen T. Hunter
and Huma Malik, 52-64. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005.
Huntington, Samuel P. ‘Will More Countries Become Democratic?’. Political Science Quarterly,
Vol. 99 No. 2 (1984), p.208.
Inglehart, Ronald and Christian Welzel. Modernization, Cultural Change, and Democracy. New
York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Inglehart, Ronald and Pippa Norris. ‘The True Clash of Civilizations’. Foreign Policy 135
(Mar/Apr 2003): 62-70.
Jamal, Amaney A. ‘Reassessing Support for Islam and Democracy in the Arab World? Evidence
from Egypt and Jordan’. World Affairs Vol. 169 No. 2 (2006):51-63.
Kedourie, Elie. Democracy and Arab Political Culture. London: Taylor & Francis, Inc., 1994.
Rahman 19
Lewis, Bernard. ‘Islam and Liberal Democracy: A Historical Overview’. Journal of
Democracy Vol. 7 No. 2 (1996): 52-63.
Mayer, Ann Elizabeth. Islam and Human Rights. Boulder: Westview Press, 1991.
Mayer, Ann Elizabeth. Islam and Human Rights (Fourth edition). Boulder: Westview Press,
1997.
Mitchell, Neil J. and James M. McCormick. 1998. “Economic and Poltiical Explanations of
Human Rights Violations.” World Politics 40:476-498.
Moghadam, Valentine M. ‘Is Gender Inequality in Muslim Societies a Barrier to Modernization
and Democratization?’. In Modernization, Democracy, and Islam, ed. Shireen T. Hunter
and Huma Malik, 98-114. Westport: Praeger Publishers, 2005.
Nieburg, H.L. 1969. Political Violence: The Behavioral Process. New York: St. Martim’s.
Poe, Steven and Neal Tate. ‘Repression of Human Rights to Personal Integrity in the 1980s: A
Global Analysis’. American Political Science Review Vol. 88 No. 4 (1994): 853–872.
Poe, Steven and Neal Tate. ‘Repression of Human Rights to Personal Integrity in the 1980s: A
Global Analysis’. American Political Science Review Vol. 88 No. 4 (1994): 853–872.
Poe, Steven and Neal Tate, and Linda Camp Keith. ‘Repression of the Human Right to Personal
Integrity Revisited: A Global Cross-national Study Covering the Years 1976–1993’.
International Studies Quarterly Vol. 43 No. 2 (1999): 291–313.
Price, Daniel. Islamic Political Culture, Democracy, and Human Rights. Westoport: Praeger,
1999.
Puddington, Arch. “Freedom in the World 2009: Setbacks and Resilience.”
<Freedomhouse.org>.
Rahman, Fazlur. ‘The Status of Women in the Quran.’ In Women and Revolution in Iran, ed.
Guity Nashat. Boulder: Westview Press, 1983.
Ross, Michael L. ‘Oil, Islam, and Women.’ American Political Science Review, 102 (2008): 107123.
Schwedler, Jillian. 2006. Faith in Moderation: Islamist Parties in Jordan and Yemen. New York:
Cambridge University Press.
Ziai, Fati. ‘Personal Status Codes and Women’s Rights in the Maghreb.’ In Muslim Women and
the Policies of Participation, ed. Mahnaz Afkhami and Erika Friedl, 72-82. Syracuse:
Syracuse University Press, 1997.
Rahman 20
Data Sources
“‘Best Practices’ Progressive Family Laws in Muslim Countries August 2005.” The Rand
Corporation and the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.
Genderstats Database. The World Bank. <http://go.worldbank.org/YMPEGXASH0>
“Islamic Family Law” project. The Law and Religion Program of Emory University.
< http://www.law.emory.edu/ifl/>
“Islamic Information Resource.” Reunite International Research Unit. <
http://www.reunite.org/resources.asp>
Key Development Data & Statistics. The World Bank. <http://go.worldbank.org/1SF48T40L0>
Millennium Development Goals Indicators. United Nations Statistics Division, Department of
Economic and Social Affairs. <http://mdgs.un.org/unsd/mdg/Default.aspx>
Minorities at Risk Project (2005) College Park, MD: Center for International Development and
Conflict Management. Retrieved from <http://www.cidcm.umd.edu/inscr/mar/>
Opec.Org <http://www.opec.org/home/>
The World Factbook. the Central Intelligence Agency.
<https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html>
“Women 2000 and Beyond: Implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action & Compliance
with International Legal Instruments on Women.” UN Division for the Advancement of Women.
<http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/>