Download Al-Sanhuri and Islamic Law

Al-Sanhuri and Islamic Law: The Place and Significance of Islamic Law in the Life and Work
of 'Abd al-Razzaq Ahmad al-Sanhuri, Egyptian Jurist and Scholar, 1895-1971 [Part II]
Author(s): Enid Hill
Source: Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 2 (May, 1988), pp. 182-218
Published by: BRILL
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3381872 .
Accessed: 19/09/2013 09:50
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
BRILL is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Arab Law Quarterly.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
The Place and Significanceof IslamicLaw in the Life andWorkof Abd alRazzagAhmadal-SanhuriEgyptianJuristand Scholar18991971*t
EnidHill:
VII. THE NEW EGYPTIAN CIVIL CODE
I)rafting,Oppositionand Consensus
A committee to revisethe EgyptianCivilCodewas formedin March1936, and alSanhuriwasappointedto it. The ostensiblereasonforestablishingthe committeewas
recognitionof the necessityof unifying and accordinglyrevising- the two existing
civilcodesin anticipationof the end of the MixedCourtsin 1949andtheirabsorption
into one nationalcourtsyseem.This committeewas, however,disbandedafterthree
monthsfor reasonsthat were "not entirelyclear",afterit had adoptedthe few preliminaryprinciplesthat formedthe first four articlesof the code (Ziadeh)(1968),
pp. 137>141).
A secondcommitteewas formedin November1936whichset out rulesgoverning
guaranteesand shufa (pre-emption).This committeewas also dissolved- in May
1938 beforefinishingits work. A thirdcommitteewas formedin late 1938,limited
to al-SanhuriandLambert,whomal-Sanhurihadbroughtintothe projectpursuantto
the opinionof the Ministryof Justicethat the codificationwould "best be accomin its first stages.An accountof the work of the complishedby two individuals>'
mitteeis contailledin a seven-volumepublicationof the Ministryof Justice:al-Qanun
al-madani:Majmu'atal-'malal-tahdiriya,(n.d.-probably 1949)pp. 5-9 andpassim
(See Ziadeh,p. 141).
On 24 April1942the completionof the draftwaspubliclyannouncedby al-Sanhuri
at a lecturegiven underthe auspicesof the RoyalGeographicSocietywherehe summarisedthe work on the Code and opened the matterfor public discussion(alSanhuri,1942)*The draftcode, he said, had beenconstructedusingcomparisonsof
of theEgyptiancourts)andthe Islamic
morethan20 moderncodesnthe jurisprudence
Sharina(Ziadeh,(1968))p. 142)*
The draftcode wasto be openfor commentfor threeyears.In 1945a committeeof
fiveheadedby al-Sanhuristudiedthe commentsandproposals,madesomerevisions,
andprepareda draftfor submissionto the legislature.A specialSenatecomrnitteewas
createdto studythe draftcode (p. 143).
* Copyright( 1987The AmericanUniversityin CairoPressand reprintedhereby permissionof the
1, Spring1987
Volume10, Monograph
inSocialScience,
publisher.FromCsiroPapers
t The firstpartof thisarticleappearedin [1988]ALQ33.
I
t This study would nol have been possibIewithoutthe variousformsof help and encouragement
receivedfrommanypeople.
182
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
183
On 30 May 1948the Senatecommitteebegana specialsessionandinvitedmembers
of the Egyptiancourts,the BarAssociation,andmembersof the law facultyof Cairo
University.Reportssay that al-Sanhuriwas "single-minded"in defendinghis code
a trulyphenomeandcounteringopposition,in the courseof whichhe "demonstrated
and that the
jurisprudence",
nal knowledgeof both the Shan'a and comparative
oppositionin the Senatewas "ephemeral"(p. 144).
Ephemeralor not, "the questionof the utilisationof the Shari'a. . . occupieda
sizeablepart of the committee'stime" (p. 145). A specialissue of al-Muhamah(the
journalof the EgyptianbarAssociation)in March1948, containing"a bitterattack"
on the proposedcode, had been circulatedamongthe membersof the Senatecommittee. The journal'scriticismswereendorsedby membersof the Courtof Cassation,
includingHasanal-Hudaybi(who laterbecameheadof the MuslimBrethrenfollowing Hasanal-Banna'sdeath)andone, MuhammadSadiqFahmi,who hadbeeninstrumentalin formingthe oppositiongroupof mainlyAzhariprofessorsandin circulating
the journalamongthe Senatecommitteemembers.He was also chief spokesmanfor
the oppositionin the committeehearings.Ziadehhas summarisedthe attackof this
groupon the draftcode:
On the one hand, it was maintained that the old code, which, with some exceptions, had been
based on French law, was in need only of some modificaiion here and there, and that it was only
right and proper to preserve the "legal culture" already occurring to Egypt. On the other hand,
it was maintained that should a complete recodification be allowed, such recodification should
be based on the Shari'a.(p. 143)
"The chargesseem inconsistent",commentsZiadeh,and explainsthis inconsistency
by the fact thatthe oppositiongroupwascomposedbothof secularlawyerstrainedin
the Frenchlegaltraditionandprofessorsof Islamiclaw at al-Azhar.
One gets a sense here, however,that thereis morethanmeets the eye. As will be
referredto in partIX, al-Sanhuricertainlyhadpoliticalenemies,especiallyamongthe
WafdParty.It was not to be the last time thata modusvivendifor oppositionwas to be
forgedbetweenWafdistpoliticiansandmembersof the MuslimBrotherhood.Whatis
moreinteresting,however,is the contentioncontainedin this statementof opposition
that when and if a recodificationtook place it should be one basedon the Shari'a,
while a caveatwas addedby al-Hudaybithat "alllegislationshouldbe basedon the
Koran"(p. 143).
The call for recodificationto be "basedon the Shari'a",as well as al-Hudaybi's
reservation,is a demonstrationpar excellenceof the basic differencebetween alSanhuri'sapproachto an islamicisationof Egyptianlaw andthatof the Islamicmovements. The differenceis not superficial.Howevermuchthe exigenciesof politicsmay
bringtogetherthoseof a basicallysecularorietltationwith the proponentsof religious
revival, there cannot, it appears,be an acceptanceon the part of the latterof any
approachto the revivalof Islamiclaw not basedfull-squarewithinreligion.
Al-Sanhuri'sapproachwas clear.The versionof his call to revisethe Codeprinted
in Frenchis almostidenticalwith the earlierprescriptionin Le Califatas concernsthe
way scholarlyand scientificwork shouldprecederenovationof law in ArabIslamic
states:
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
184
LAW QUARTERLY
ARAB
of the rules of Islarriiclaw) must be . . .
point of departure(to restore the original energy
The
from the temporal part. The religious part,
separation of the religous part of Muslim law
the
monopoly of the Muslim theologians.
we avoid in our examination, should remain the
which
(1938b), p. 623).
(al-Sanhuri,
to expresshis distinction
Arabicversion,however,uses a differentphraseology
The
with whicha Western
the religousandthe secular(or temporalWameaning
betmreen
below, since how alhas no trouble. The Arabicversionis reproduced
audience
languageis instructive
phrasedhis secularismwithintheidiomsof the Arabic
Sanhuri
above.
the contextof whathasbeen discussed
in
scientific renovation, in order to rescue it
do not deny that the Shari'ais in need of solid
We
with the limitations to which the latter-day
intellectual stagnation and allow it to break
from
urlstswere tled.
be based on a study of the Shan'aaccording
We proposed in LeCalifalthat this undertaking
law. This new sludy is based on the distinction
tothe new scientific method of cornparative
it is not the former but the latter that it our
rules;
religious rules and legal (qanuniyya)
between
associatesreligion with Islamic jurishere. We make a distinction between a rule which
concern
a
respected in the heart, and a rule resting on
prudence,and which depends on faith and is
s<:ientific
our
of
purview
the
within
that comes
foundationof pure legal logic. It is the latter
.
13)
1
p.
1936d),
(
(al-Sanhuri,
.
invesligations
have been more methodological
The issue for the opposition,however,seems to
of the Senatedebate.In the
course
the
during
thansubstantive,as was demonstrated
of oppositionreferredto
sameissue of al-Muhamahthat containedthe statement on the Shan'a, "to show
be based
above,was a "samplelaw of contract"allegedto
howit couldbe done".
derived from the Shannsand insisted that had
Al-Sanhurireviewed the provisions that had been
done so. He then took up the sample draft
gladly
itbeen possible to derive more, he would have
group and demonstrated, principle by principle,
ofthe law of contracts prepared by the Fahnii
be based on the Shari'ait was in point of fact based
that,although the sample draft purported to
"that the provisions in the Sadiq sarnple
on modern codes. "If it were true," he declared,
code were Shan'a rules, then we would
draft
draft which agree with the provisions of the
the provisions of the draft code itselfn'(Ziadeh,
havebeen justified in clainiing Shari'aorigin for
publicaiion, pp. 88-93).
(1968), pp. 145-146, from Ministry of Jusiice
of al-Sanhuriandthe tourdeforce
Withoutwishingto detractfromthisperformance
unintendedhappenswhenthe
thatit undoubtedlywas, it wouldseemthatsomething
its substantiveidentitywouldseem
Shari'sis put into an alienformat.Somethingof
thatis, thereis anal-Sanhurito
to mergewith the alienmethodologyof form unless,
underlyingthe legalrules and
providethe theoreticalexpositionas to the principles
theirgenealogy.
drewthe teeth of the oppositionand in the
In any case, al-Sanhuri'sperformance
as to whetherthe Shari'ahad
Senatechamber"onlyone deputyraisedthe question
received".On 15
enthusiastically
been sufficientlyutilised",and the "draftlaw was
revised
al-Sanhuri's
to an end,
October1949, the day when the MixedCourtscame
codebecamethe lawof Egypt(Ziadeh,p. 146).
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
185
VIII. IS THE REVISED CIVIL CODE ISLAMIC?
Assessments of Scholarsand Critics
The issue of basingEgypt'slaws on the Shari'ais an old one. QadriPasha,as earlier
noted, did his condificationsof Islamiclaw in the 1870sin anticipationof theiruse as
the law of new nationalcourtsestablishedin 1883.The Egyptianrulersof that time,
however,opted to preparea code based on the Code Napoleonalthoughit appears
thatmoreof QadriPasha'scode was includedthanis usuallyrealised(supra,
partVI).
When the projectof the revisionof the code was first in the air in the mid-1930s
calls were again raised for the codificationof the Shan'a (see Ziadeh, pp. 20,
13S139). The MuslimBrethren,in particular,sincetheirfoundingin 1928(anduntil
their abolitionas a party in 1954), continuouslyhad as a prominentgoal that the
Shari'abecome the law of Egypt (p. 137; see also Harris(1964), chapterIV). And
there continueto be calls today to make the laws Islamic.Draft codes, purportedly
basedon the Shan'a,werepreparedby a cornmissionset up in 1978,but no definitive
actionon them has been taken. It wouldappearthatconcernwith makingthe lawsof
EgyptIslamic,or "moreIslamic",is endemic.
The issueof islamicisationof lawis, perhaps,pre-eminentlyan issueof nationalism,
at leaston one level. Whereasal-Sanhuriwascertainlyhimselfa nationalist,workedin
variousnationalistcauses(see partIX), andwas consciousof his workon the revision
of the code as a contributionto Egyptian,as well as Arab,nationalism(see partXII),
on the popularlevel the law must be recognisably
Islamic.If the Shan'arulesbecome
embeddedin the modern,abstractlanguageof codes so that they lose their identity
except to the legal-lyerudite,islamicisationhas not, for all practicalpurposes,taken
place.The verdicton the popularand fundamentalist
levelas to whetheral-Sanhuri's
civil code is Islamic-or sufficientlyso-must clearlybe in the negative.
For legalscholars,al-Sanhuri'sclaimthat:
We adoptedfrom the Shari'a
all that we could adopt, havingregardto sound principlesof
modernlegislation;and we did not fall shortin this respect(Anderson,(1954), p. 30 quoiing
Ministryof Justicep. 85)
was, of course, takenseriously,and the new code was examinedin termsof whatits
debt to the Shan'apurportedto be. However,just as certainstandardsand expectationsof his criticswereevidentat the timeof the debateon the revisedcode, so also
areotherkinds of standardsand preconceptionsoperatingamongthose who view alSanhuri'sworkthroughWesterneyes.
The main commentaryin Englishon the new Egyptiancivil code remainsthat of
JND Anderson(1954)where"the debt to the Shan'aof the civil code"is categorised
as beingof fourkinds:
(1) The Shari'ais "one of the sourcesfromwhichan appropriaterule or principle
may be derivedby the courtsin defaultof any relevantprovision"in the code or
custom('ury)(as providedin Art. 1 of the Code);
(2) The Shari'a"irifluencedthe choice"between"certainconceptson whichEuropeancodesaredivided"(e.g., objectivityas opposedto subjectivityin obligations);
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
186
(3) "A few principlesor provisions"were "newlyborrowedfrom the Shari'a,
whetherexclusively,chiefly,or in part";
(4) There were "principlesor provisionstaken over by the previouslegislation
fromtheShan'ain wholeor in partandpreserved. . . in theiroriginalor amended
fonn". (Anderson,(1954),p. 31)
Andersonquotes (as does also Ziadeh,p. 144) the remarkmade by al-Sanhuri
beforeffie Senatecommitteein 1948that "threequartersor five-sixthsof the provisionsof this law are basedon the decisionsof the Egyptiancourtsand on existing
legislaiion"(Andersonp. 30, quotingfromthe Ministryof Jusiicep. 70). Although
the contextof this remarkwas the refutationof a criticismthat the multiplicityof
foreignsourceswouldcauseprob}emsin referringto the historicalsourcesin orderto
solvea legalproblem,it wouldappearto indicate andthis is thesenseof Anderson's
use of the quotation- that"thedebtto theShan'aof the newcivilcode"wassmall.A
recentlyexpressedviewin Egyptby a legalscholaris alsothattherulestakenfromthe
Shari'awere"of limitedscope . . . andmanyof thesehadbeenin the old code>>
(A1bishri,(1985),p. 629).
Al-Sanhurihimself,writingsome twentyyearslater,saysthat"the new code continues to be representativeof Westerncivil culture,not Islamiclegal culture"(alSanhuri,(1962),p. 12).His viewwasthatEgypt'sWestern-based
civillawhadbecome
partof thecountry'slegalcultureandtherefore';asuddenreturn(to Islamiclaw)would
havebeendifficultandwouldhavecauseddisturbances
andconfusion"(p. 13).
If the new code hadnot becomecomprehensively
Islamicit had, however,become
Egyptianised-not only in the extensivereferencingof "the jurisprudenceof the
Egyptiancourts"but alsoin the methodof codificationitself. The rulesincorporated
fromforeigncodeshadbeeneclecticallychosenon the basisof al-Sanhuri's
analysisof
theirsuitabilityto Egyptianconditionsandhis notionof justicedistilledfromhis comparaiivestudies, includingthe Shan'a,and, one can presume,his own legal and
judicialpracticein Egypt.As he toldthe Senatecommittee,thelegalrulestakenfrom
foreigncodes "havean existenceindependentof the sourcesfrom which they are
taken' (Ziadeh,p. 144, quotingMinistryof Justicepp. 7W71).Moreover some of
therulgsof foreignorigintakenfromthe old code hadalreadybeen filteredthrough
theEgyptianenvironmentin theirapplicationby Egypt'sjudgestO controversies
arislilg Wlt lln t ;leenvlronment.
Egyptianisation,however,is itself not withouta connectionto Islamiclaw. In his
callfor the revisionof codesat the timeof mountingeffortsin the countryto achieve
national
independence,al-Sanhurihadsaid:
.
.
.
.
Itis incumbent on us first and foremost to Egypiianize the jurisprudenceand make it
completelyEgypiian . . . and in this . . . the IslamicShan'ais before us . . . since it is the most
itIlportantelement in the intellectual development growing in our land; . . . and this heritage can be
a
meansof breathing the spirit of independence into our jurists and legislators. (quoted in alBishri)p. 628)
Al-Sanhuri
had repeatedlyemphasisedthat law was "a living thing" continuously
"growing
and taldngnourishmentfromits environment".Judicialinterpretationof
lawis certainlyone way of makingadjustmentsin law to its environment both to
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
187
changingsocial and economicconditionsas well as
being a way of incorporatinga
country'scustomsand traditionsinto its formalised
law. Al-Sanhuri'sfirst scholarly
work(1925) had been an investigationof how legal
evolutionhad occurredin an area
of English judge-madelaw. Concerning
al-Sanhuri'suse of Egyptian judicial
cleclslons:
.
.
.
By taking account of the decisions of the
Egyphan courts and opinions of the jurists,
al-Sanhuri
represented the environment of transactions in real
life, so that legal rule could come from the
marunersof the people, their way of life, and their
modes of interaciion. (al-Bishri, p. 629)
Egypt certainlyhas deep rootsin her Islamicpast,
includingthe legalrelationsof
thatcivilisation.Thus, to the extentto which
Egypt'sjudgestookaccountof the legal
andsocialrelationsembeddedin the culture,
partsof that legaltraditionwouldhave
been preserved.But it must also be remembered
that, for much of the time since
1876, Egypt's legal historyhad includedforeign
judgesapplyingessentiallyforeign
lawin mixed courts,andal-Sanhuriwas as aware
of this as anyone.Nonetheless,it is
undeniablethat he viewed the jurisprudenceof the
Egyptiarlcourts as centrally
importantto the revisionof the code. Certainly,
theoretically,
the use of these Egyptiandecisionscould haveservedas a conduitof
legalcustomsand traditions,Islamic
orotherwise,into the codifiedlaw. The
validationof this propositionmust, however,
awaita detailedexaminationof the contextand
contentof the courtdecisionscited by
al-Sanhuri
in his commentarieson the new code.
Nonetheless,the "debtto the Shan'a" thatAndersoncites
as beingin explicitform
isnot inconsiderable.Brieflysummarisedit is:
Principles
orprovisions
takenfromthepreviouslegislation,
which concern: the disposiiion of death
propertyduring sickness; ghubn(lesion
inadequacy of price or other defect
in a purchase);
riskin purchasing; planting or building on
leased land; ownership of different stories in
the
same
building or a party wall; shufa (pre-emption
rights); gifts; the principle of no inheritance
until
after payment of debts.
Provisions
"newlyborrowed"
fromtheShari'a,which concern: the duraiion of
the meeiing at
which
a contract is concluded; legal capacity;
lease of waqf property; contract of hikr(rent
for
land
or building for an
extended period); terminationof lease on death of
lessee and terminaiion
of
lease "for serious and unforeseen
circumstances;" release of debt by unilateral declaraiion.
Andersonalso includesinfluencesof the Shan'ain the
guidingof "choiceof certain
concepts
. . . when Europeancodesaredivided"as
follows:
An
objective rather than a sllbjective tendency;
principles applicable to the abuse of rights,
using
both subjective and objeciive tests; legal
consequences of excepiional and unpredictable
events;
provisions regardingassignment of debt. (Anderson,
pp. 31A5).
Thecompletelegislativehistoryof the new codeis
containedin the Ministryof Justice
publicationpreviouslycited, publishedshortlyafter the
(:ode was passed into
law.
In additionto the explanatorymemorandum
accompanying
the new codeandthe
Senate
debateverbatim,thesevolumescontaina detailed
account,
articleby ariicle,of
the
code indicatingchangesfromthe old code,
discussionsin the draftingcommittees,
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
188
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
anddiscussionsof the sourcesof individualarticlesandintent.Onlyby goingthrough
these sevenvolumeswill it be possibleto assesswhetherAndersonhas pickedup all
the explicitand implicit"debtsto the Shan'a".It wouldalso be interestingto comparethe finalresultwithal-Sanhuri's
ownextensivedetailingof possibilitiesof further
incorporation
of Islamicrulesof lawin his 1936articleproposingthe revisions.
Anderson'slisting does, however,conformfairlycloselywith a brief summaryof
the Islamic rules in the code that al-Sanhuriincludedin an article written later
(al-Sanhuri,(1962),p. 12). The maindivergencesconcernthe way in whichareasof
law are defined.There also seems to be somedifferenceof opinionas to whethera
coupleof the rulesor principlescomefromthe old codeorwerenewlyadded,but this
differencemay be more apparentthan real due to differentlevels of specificityat
whichareasof law areidentifiedin the twoarticles.
Al-Sanhurialso pointsin this articleto anotherfeatureof the new code, namelyan
innovationof "flexibility".The new code, he says, had substituted"flexiblestandards"in placeof "inflexiblerules",so that "solutionscan changewhen conditions
change"(al-Sanhuri,(1962),p. 14).
ChafikChehata,once with the Facultyof Law in CarioUniversity,subsequently
Professorassociatedwith the Facultede droitel desscienceseconomiques
of Paris,has
also writtenon the new Egyptiancode, firstin a seriesof articlesin theffournaldes
TnbunauxMixtesduringthe 1940s(Chehata,(194648)), thenconcerningspecifically
"lessurvivances
musulmanes"
in it (Chehata,(1965)).His categorisingof the areasof
the Shan'a influenceis differentfromAnderson'sas is alsohis generalassessmentas
to the extentof the debt.
Chehata'sprimaryconcernis with areasof law in contrastto Anderson'sprimary
divisioninto kind and sourceof influence.Chehata'sbasicdivisionis threefold:(1)
mattersof obligationor personalrights;(2) mattersof propertyrights;and(3) Muslim
law as a formalsourceof Egyptianlaw. It is in Chehata'sareaof propertyrightsthat
Anderson's"new provisions"and "provisionsfrom previouslegislation"appear.
These areprovisionsof Shan'alaw, Chehataremarks)"applieddirectly".
As concernsthe subjectof obligations,"its historicalsourceis Romanlaw . . .
(but)a generaltheoryof obligationwasnot completelyconstructedby the Romans".
The theoryof obligationfound in thosemodernlegalsystemsbasedon Romanlaw
wasdevelopedfromvariouselementsin Romanlawby meansof glossing."In Muslim
law", coniinuesChehata:
valuable elements are furriishedto us by the scholarsof jurisprudence,allowing us, in our turn,
to elaboratea general theory that can correspondto that elaboratedfrom Roman law. (p. 844)
This is whatChehatahimselftriedto do in his Theonegeneralede l'obligation
en droit
Musulmanhanefite(1936).
Such was also the intentionof al-Sanhurias he workedon the new Civil Codeof
Iraq(see suprapartV andal-Sanhuri,(1936c)),in variousworksconcerningtheoryof
contractsand of obligation,and of coursein his subsequentstudy of the sources
of legal rights(195F1959). Thus it is not sufficientto point to particularprovisions
in specifiedarticlesthatdirectlyincorporatea Shan'alegalrule to comprehendwhat
al-Sanhuriwas tryingto do in makingthe new code "moreIslamic".The principles
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
189
underlyinglegal right or obligationin Islarniclaw influencewhat rules are selected
from variousmoderncodes. Al-Sanhurihas indicatedthat this was his intentionand
Chehataconfirmsthatit is indeedto be foundin the new code:
In general,the spiritthat dominatesthe subject(of obligaiion)in Muslimlaw is an Qbjeccive
tendency.... The Egypiianlegislatorof 1949 has opted for this objectivetendencyand
throughthis bias has linked up againwith the line of Muslimjudicialthoughtof the past.
Althoughhe has not borroweddirectlyfromthe Muslimsourceswhichinspirethis tendency,
by recognizingthe biasunderlyinglegalsoluiions,has chosenthosesolutionsin Westerncodes
whichareconsistentwith this new concepiion.(Chehata,(1965),p. 844)
All commentatorson the new EgyptianCivilCodereferto the provisionsin Article
1 providingthat, in the absenceof an appropriate text in the law, the Shan'a is) after
(but before"naturaljusticeand the rulesof equity")to be a sourceof law.
sCcustom>
Chehatarefersto the makingof Islamiclaw a "formalsourcein all mattersof civil
law"as "themost importantinnovationof the EgyptianCivilCode."Thus:
for Muslim society . . . the Muslim law (the spirit which animatesit and the fundameIltal
reasoningbehindits injunction)becomesa kindof preludeto naturallaw, strictly speaking,
and he predlcts that:
aftersornetime has elapsedtherewill be, throughthe practiceof the courts- helpedof course
by the new Egyptianlegaldoctrine-a new receptionof Islamiclaw. (p. 853)
The Shan's may, however,actuallybe morethana "preludeto naturallaw"in this
first articleof the EgyptianCode. Precedingreferenceto the IslamicSharia in the
firstarticlethe judgeis enjoinedto ;'decideaccordingto custom'. The contentionhas
been madethatin Egypt"custom' ('urf)is for the mostpart,Islamiclaw.
In Egyptiansociety are found many customs('adat)which are practicesknownto people ir
their transactions,and which are suitabletools for interpreiingthe will of contractingpariies.
(al-Bishri,(1965),p. 630)
But thereis ;'no widespreadlegal consciousness'that they constitute'a requiredor
determinaterule".Custom(urJ)in its technicalmeaningis knownusually"onlyinsofaras it is a rulethatcomesfromthe Shan'a . . . eitherfromthe worksof Islamicjurists or rootedin their sources(masadir)"(p. 630). That is, judicialinterpretationin
referringto custom(as urf) wouldbe in pointof factreferringto Islamiclaw.
Both the Libyanand Syriancodes)in the correspondingarticles,specifyresortto
the Shan'a beforecustoms.One Westernscholarhas hypothesisedthat "the variants
in phrasing"in thesecodesindicate"a somewhatdifferentapproach"to theShan'aas
a sourceof law (Liebesny,(1975), p. 95). However,consideringthe extensivecorrespondencebetweenlegallyrelevant"custom"andtheShari'ain the Egyptiancontext
alludedto above, the practicaleffect of this reversedpriorityin directingthe judgeto
a sourceof law outsidethe Codemay, in fact, be negligible.
Somethingof significancedoes, however,suggestitself. Certainlyal-Sanhuriwas
awareof the subtletiesof the legal meaningof 'urf.What, then, has he done? One
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
190
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
couldlook at it in two ways. Eitherhe has madethe
new code appearto be less susceptibleto evolutionin an Islamicdirection(throughthe
courts'jurisprudence)
than
it actuallyis (beingbut anotherinstanceof
clothingIslamicsubstancein "modern"
form);or, he hasprovidedfor a morepopulist and
Egyptian interpretation
of Islamic law beforethe Shan'a is to be openedup in its
entirety.Perhapshe intended
both.
Whatthencanbe saidof al-Sanhuri'srevisedCivilCode
is it or is it not Islamic?
Al-Sanhuri's
ownclaimswererelativelymodestas concernsthe
islamicisation
of the
Code.He neversaidthathe hadproducedan "Islamic
Code".It was rathera beginning, the settingof a direction."The Egyptian
legislator
twentyyearslater;"thata step had been takentoward believed",he was to write
returningto the Islamicjurisprudence"
(al-Sanhuri,(1962),p. 13).
How then, to assessthis beginningstep?How does
one estimatethe extentof the
incorporation
andlorinfluenceof Islamiclaw on this Code?Does one
countarticles,
calculate
ratios,seekunderlyingprinciplesof legalright?Ordoes
form
so overwhelm
substance
as to makethe quest ultimatelymeaningless?
Is the geniusof Islamiclaw,
afterall, its historicalform and method?Is it indeed
inseparablefrom its original
foundation
and thus inseparablefrom religion?Or-inasmuch
as al-Sanhuri'sCivil
Codehas weatheredthe yearswell, has proveditselfa
veryrespectedandserviceable
codeoes it reallymatterwhetherit is or is not, or to what
extent,Islamic?
Now thatis a questionfor whichthereis a verycertain
answer:Yes, it doesmatter.
The issue of Islamiclaw is firstand foremosta
politicalquestion.It is partof the
continuing
struggletakingplacein the wakeof the expansionof
Westerncapitalism
andwith it the spreadof Westernculture.Todaythe
issueis "dependency'conomic,political,cultural while in al-Sanhuri'sday it
was called"the nationalquestion" politicalindependenceandnationalsovereignty.
Giventhe centralityof law to
anation-state'spoliticalsymbolismand cultural
identity,it wouldseem mandatory
that
the lawcomefrom"the nation'swomb" a phrase
usedin 1936(justas the first
revision
committeemet) by a judgeof the supremeShari'acourt,
whosecall for the
restoration
of the Shan'awas, he said, not for religiousreasons
but
fromthe "dictate
of
patriotism".
A
nationis disiinguishedfrom other nationsby its
individualcharacteristics,
chief among
which
is its jurisprudence
. . . Upon my life, the (existing)legislationis not
of the nation's
womb.
(quotedin Ziadeh,p. 140)
Al-Sanhuri'spatnoticsentimentsare not in question.
Whereasthe projectof the
revision
of the CivilCodewas no "restoration
of the Shari'a"pureand simple,from
its
incepiionto its promulgationit wasinspiredby concernsof
nationalistpolitics.
Norwasit al-Sanhuri's
onlypoliticalact. Activitiesinvolvinghimin issuesthat
concerned
Egypt'spoliticalindependenceand nationalstatusbegan
when
he
was
young
and
continuedfor muchof his life. These activitiesweremany
and various,at times
embroiling
himin thepartypoliticsof his day,at timesallowing
himto utilisehis legal
talents.
Afterthe CivilCode,his othermajorcontributionto
the buildingof national
legal
institutionsand a modernlegalculturein Egyptwashis
workon the Mailisaldawla.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
191
IX. NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL POLITICS
Politicianand Minister
Al-Sanhuriwas caughtup in the currentsof politicsin Egypt fromthe beginningof
his professionallife. He wasa youngassistant(wakil)in the niyabalX
in Mansuraat the
time of the (1919)revolution.He joinedthe Wafdistmovementandorganiseda successful strike of employeesin his office and, as a result was transferredto distant
Asyut, in UpperEgypt(Rhattab,(1971))p. 4).
In 1934 al-Sanhuriwas againinvolvedin politics,or allegedlyso. He was temporarily suspendedfrom the universitywhen the governmentaccusedhim of questionablepoliticalactivities,namelyforminga groupof studentswhich,underthe guiseof
being a literaryand culturalgroup)was pursuingpoliticalaims (Castro,(1984), pp.
85-86)* Al-Sanhuridefendedhimself in an interviewpublishedin al-Ahram
on 19
August 1934)wherehe deniedthe accusationof havingfoundeda politicalgroup.
Whenal-SanhurireturnedfromIraqin 1936he was appointedDean of the Faculty
of Law at Cairo Urliversity. Withinthe year,however)he left the university"forpoliticalreasons".It is safeto assumethatthese"politicalreasons"wereconnectedto his
longstandingcontroversieswith the Wafdandhis associatlonwithAhmadMaherand
Nuqrashi.He left the Wafdwhentheydid in 1937andjoinedthemwhentheyformed
the Saadistparty,whichpartyal-Sanhurirepresentedin variousministriesthereafter.
A series of governmentappointmentsensuedfor al-Sanhuriover the next twelve
years, includingthat to the Mixed judiciaryof Mansura(1938-1939), interspersed
with the practiceof lawin 1942and 1945/46.Whenesrer
a Wafdistcabinetcamein, he
was predictablyput out or transferred.
Nahhas hated Sanhurl and pursued him vindiciively over the years. In 1937 Nahhas fired him
from his deanship and the civil code committee . . . (and) Nahhas forced him out once more in
1942. (RiedX(1981), pp. 15F155).
Al-Sanhuriis listed as being a deputy(wakiE)in the Mmistryof Education(1939)
and in the Ministryof Justice(1944). He was appointedMinisterof Educationrepresenting the Saadist Party in a cabinet under Ahmad Maher and Nuqrashi
(1945-1946).Then he was brieflya Ministerof State(RoyalCounsellor)and in 1947,
when NuqrashisucceededIslamicSidqi as PrimeMinister,he was againappointed
Ministerof Education.Thereis scantdocumentationof his activitiesin thesegovernment posts. One eulogistsays that "he set out huge projectsof educationincludinga
programfor eradicatingilliteracy"(Khattab,1971).
A contemporaryemployeein the Ministryof Educationrecollectsthatit was durmg
al-Sanhuri'stime that the school systemof Egypt becameunified.Anothercontemporaryin the Ministryclaimedthatunderhim it was"amodelof the ministriesat that
tirne'>and quotesal-Sanhurias saying,on the occasionof his departure:
I succeeded with most of my projects there. I only fell down in two matters: (eliminating the
12 See E Hill Makkama! (1979a),chapters1 & 2 foran explanation
of the EgyptiallNiyaba as an institution its historicaldevelopment,structureandfunctions.See alsoHill (1979b),pp.11S134.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
192
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
pracocesoi) privatelessonsand giving roomsin the Ministryto seliioremployees.(Allam,
(1986),p. 160)
Irregularitieson the lower levels of governmentlife, it would seem, were just as
intractableas the variouscorruptionson a largerscalewith which governmentand
countrywereplagued.
Dunng this periodalsohe was, of course,workingon the revisionof the CivilCode
andhe continuedwriiinglegaltreatises.Buthe alsoappearsto havewrittenforseveral
popularpoliticaljournalssuchas al-Hilal,al-Siyasaandal-Balagh.At the sametime
his legacyto the LawFacultycontinuedin the use thereof materialshe hadprepared
earlier,namelya basictext bookfor law students,Usulal-qanun(Principlesof Law)
(al-Sanhuri,(1941)).
FromJanuaryto May 1937he was editorof the journalal-Qanunwal-iqlisad(Law
andEconomy)al-Sanhuri,(1937)).In 1937alsohe headedthe Egyptiandelegationto
the SecondInternational
Congressof Comparative
Lawat The Haguewherehe again
defendedthe Shari'a.
In the sectionfordroitonentalat thatCongresstherapporteur
notediithehighquality of the discussions"and that, for the firsttime, discussionhadtakenplacein Arabic. The Congressvoted to invite delegatesfrom "all universitieswhere there are
professorsor scholarswho are interestedin Islamiclaw" to attendthe next conference. The Congressalsoadopteda resolutionstatingthat"Islamiclawis ableto adapt
itselfto the needsof life" (Congres,(1937),pp. 53-54). Al-Sanhuripresenteda paper
entitled,"La responsibilite
civileetpenaleendroitmusulman"
(al-Sanhuri,1937)).
By the 1940sal-Sanhurihadbecomeprominentin publiclife andhis namebeganto
appearamongthe membersof Egyptiandelegationssent abroadto representEgypt
and to negotiatemattersof nationalpoliticalconcern.In 1946he is notedas having
headedthe Egyptiandelegationto a conferenceon Palestinein Londonand in the
sameyearan Egyptiandelegationto the UnitedNations.But it is the 1947representationmade to the UN that had historicalimpact.Al-Sanhuriwas a memberof that
delegation,one of the "distinguishedjurists"whoaccompanied
Nuqrashi,"anhonest
man". The latter, as PrimeMinister,led this delegationwhich presented"Egypt's
complaint"againstEngland,an effort on the part of the Egyptiangovernmentto
transferthe ineffectualnegotiationswith Britainover continuedoccupationand the
questionof nationalindependencefor Egypt(as well as for the Sudan)to an internationalforum. At the UN it was the questionof the occupationby Britainof the
Sudanunder the aegis of the Anglo-EgyptianCondominiumof 1899 with which
Egypthad hadlittle to do sincethe 1920s thatwasthe centerof the complaint.The
UN adjournedEgypt'srequestsinedie, a defeatfor Egyptin her firstattemptto use
the new forumof internationaldiplomacy,and for Nuqrashia personaldefeatwhich
was turnedinto a success as it fueled increasedanti-imperialist
demonstrationsat
homeand he was givena hero'swelcomewhen he returned(see Berque,(1972),pp.
600 603;655456;and pessim).
One of al-Sanhuri's"researchinterests",notesa recentbibliographical
entry,was
"negotiationson the Egyptianquestion"(Allarn,(1986),p. 159).
Also duringthis periodal-Sanhuriwas involvedwith establishingthe Instituteof
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
193
High Arab Studies,a creationof the ArabLeague.He becameheadof its legal division wherehe gavelecturesand supervisedtheses(see MIDEO, (1954),(1957). The
Institute still exists, as an adjunct to ALESCO-The Arab League Educational,
Scientificand CulturalOrganisation.
This was the closesthe cameto seeingthe establishmentof an Arabuniversity- an
aspirationhe seemsto haveheld, alludedto hereandtherein the briefaccountsof his
life.
In 1946he becamea memberof the Group(maima')
of the ArabicLanguagewhose
conferenceshe participatedin and for whom he workedon projectsdevelopingthe
Arabiclanguage,notablyin the committeeconcerninglaw andeconomics(seeMajallatal-maima'
(1953, etc.; Allam, (1968), p. 158). In one of theirmeetings,in 1948he
gavea presentationon the Arabiclanguageby likeningit to the law(al-Qulali,(1972);
Majallatal-majma',
(1953),pp. lll-115).
For these twelve years, then, al-Sanhuriwas active very active-on the stage of
nationalpolitics and its intellectuallife. He joined the SaadistParty, the party of
AhmadMaherand Nuqrashi,formedin 1938 followingtheir expulsionby Nahhas
fromthe Wafdcabinetin late 1937.It was "theeffendis'
party,thatof . . . technicians
and managers"(Berque,(1972),p. 630). But AhmadMaherwas murderedin February 1945 in the parliamentbuildingsa month after the electionsthat had given his
partya sufficientpluralityto form a government.Maherhad just obtainedapproval
fromparliamentto declarewaron the Axis in orderto ensureEgypt'sparticipationin
the United Nations. Maherwas succeededby Nuqrashiwho was himselfassassinated
threeyearslater,afterissuingan orderfor the dissolutionof the MuslimBrotherhood,
a measuretakenunderthe impositionof martiallaw to counterthe risingterrorismin
the countrythat had eruptedfollowingthe declarationof the Stateof Israeland the
Palestinewar. Al-Sanhurispoliticalfortunesparalleledthose of his countryduring
these times. He too sufferedfromwhat the countryand its politicswereenduringthe repeatedcollapseof governments.
Politicalintrigueandthe tripartitejockeyingfor positionandpowerbetweenWafd,
Palaceand British,and its exacerbationdllringthe yearsfollowingthe SecondWorld
War, had distortedEgypt'spoliticsandoftenunderminedbothgenuineandcosmetic
efforts of reform.Palaceand cabinetintrigueshad their counterpartsin the streets.
Demonstrationsand strikes, terrorismand violence, seemed to have become an
integralpartof Egypt'spoliticalculture.
Al-Sanhuri'spoliticalfortuneswere still, however,on the rise, and in March1949
he was appointedto the top positionin the newly formedMajlisal-dawla.The circle
hadin a sense beencompleted.He resignedhis partyaffiliationandresumedthe mantle of jurist.
But the politicalforcesin Egyptof thosedaysdid not let anyoneremainpolitically
neutralfor long, and certainlynot an Egyptian-Arab
nationalistwho had workedfor
overtwentyyearsto promoteEgypt'sintellectualandlegalindependenceandher participaiionin internationalfora. It was inevitablethatthe politicsof the countrywould
not bypass even the respected juridical personalitythat al-SanhuriPasha had
become-especially such a figure,who used the weaponsof legallanguageand principles of rightagainsthis politicalopponents.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
194
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
X. CONSTITUTIONALIShl
AND POLITICS
Presidentof the Mailisal-Dawla
His appointmentasra'is(president) thatis, chiefjusticef theMajlisal-dawla(the
}ierarchyof administrativecourts and body that issues advisoryopinions)in 1949
providedas-Sanhuriwith an excellentpositionfromwhich to developthe spiritof
independencein Egypts judiciaryandadherenceto law in the wholestructureof the
government.It wasan institutionwhichhadonlyshortlybeforebeenestablished in
1946.
Al-Sanhuriaffirmsthat the Mailis al-dawlais patternedon the French Conseil
dnEtat(al-Sanhuri,(1950),p. 1). Evenamongcountrieswith a definedadministrative
law and specialisedtribunalsto applyit) the FrenchConseild>Etatis "a uniqueinstituiion"(David, (1972), p. 131). Datingbackto 1799,it has grownup as a separate
judicialstructureexercisingfar-reachingand independentsupervisionover officials,
agenciesandtheirfunctionaries;thatis, overall thattouchesthe executionof the law
and lts abuse.It is not the guardianof the constitutionexplicitly,but as guardianof
the executionof Iawit becomesinvolvedwith issues that in othersystemsare dealt
with as constitutionalcases.
When the Frenchadministrativeapparatusfirst acquiredindependencefrom the
judicialpower in 1790, Rene David (doyen of Frenchlegal scholars)tells us) "it
understoodthe dangerof arbitraryactionandcorruptionthatmenacesthoseholding
power",and it introduced"a self-limitationof its powers".The institutiondesigned
for this purposewas to becomethe ConseildnEtal,and remainsthe meansby which
the Frenchadministrative
apparatusis regulated.Fromthe Presidentof the Republic
to mayors,ministersand prefectsand all who are associatedwith executivepower,
"allaresubjectin Franceto havingtheiractivitiessubmittedto criticismandcensure
by the ConseildnEtat"(David, (1960)I, p. 329.
Al-Sanhurirecountssomethingof the pasthistoryof the EgyptianMajlis al-dawla
andfiftyyearsof attempts to establishit in his prefatoryarticleto the firstissueof the
journalof the Mailis al-dawZain 1950:
The establishmentof the EgyptianMailisal-dawlawas precededby othereffortsln the past.
The firstattemptwasin 1879,followedby a secondtryin 1883,but thattoowasdestinednot to
have a successfuloutcome.The governrnental
JudiciaryCommitteeopposedthe systemof a
Mailisal-dawla.(al-Sanhuri,
(1950),p. 2)13
It shouldbe rememberedthat the EgyptianMinistryof Justicehad in its midst a
personageknownas the "judicialadviser".The post was establishedfrom the early
days of the occupationand filled by an Englishmanuntil 1936)fromwhichvantage
In an ariiclepublishedin France,al-Sanhuri
givesa littlemorebackground
on theseearlyattempts.
The firsttirnethe Egyptianlegislatortriedto givethe countrya Conseild2Etatwasby a decreeof 23 April
1879. . . It was to havethreefunctions:legislativeconsultaiiveand adjudicative.But for reasonsconnectedwiththe situationof the publicdebtandthestate'sfinances,this lawwasnot executed.
In the organiclaw of May 1883, the legislatoralsoanticipatedthe creationof a "conseild etat"whose
functionswereliniitedby the decreeof 22 September1883to beingconsultaiiveandlegislaiiveonly, and
excludingthatof adjudicaiion.
Butthis reforrn,forpoliiicalreasons,wasalsosuspendedby thedecreeof 13
November1884.(al-Sanhuri,1952: 578).
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
195
pointconsiderableinfluenceon the governmentwasexerted,judiciarycommitteesnot
excluded.There is no waythe Britishwouldhavelookedkindlyon the establishment
of a Mailis al-dawlain theirmidst. It wouldhave been yet anotherfeatureof French
law, the baneof the Briiishin Egyptand, moreover,an institutionquiteincompatible
with the needsof an occupationregime,givenits ethosandraisond'etreas guardianof
rightsarldlibertiesfromadministrative
abuse
However, al-Sanhuri,writingin 1950)praisesthe previouswork of the Judiciary
Committee Its work,he tellsusZhadbeen"re-examined"
in 1923.Thatwasthe year,
be it remembered,of the EgyptianConstitutionwhich set up an independentparliamentarysystem of government,and Briiishhegemony?at least ostensibly,began to
diminish.But thereis an additionalreasonwhy al-Sanhurichoosesto view the Judiciary Committee(at least in "re-examined"forrn)in a favorablelight. Whereasit did
noe have all the attributesof a Mailisal-dawla(functionsoffatwa and the legislation
only)) it "contributedgreatserviceto the country",and was C'theprimarybasis on
which the presentMailisal-dawlawas set up" (al-Sanhuri,(1950).pp. 2-3).
A new judicialinstitutionfor Egypt, which clearlyand admittedlywas patterned
closely on the French Conseild'Etat, nonethelesscan be seen to have grown from
somethingalreadyexistingin the country.And al-Sanhurihas a point.The Mailisaldawlaof Egyptdidtakeon the functionsof issuingadvisoryopinions(fatawa) aIldof
advisingon anddraftinglegislation(althoughit wasto becomemuchmorethanthat).
Something new coming out of something old that was a favorite theme of
al-Sanhuri's,somethinghe continuouslystressedin his legalwork, and the title of a
piece he wrotefor the popularmagazine)al-Hilalin 1949.The editorshadaskedhim
to writeon 4'thenew"fora specialissue concerning"al-Jadid",but)he says, he could
not writeon '<thenew"unlesshe added"theold', because'vthenewcomesout of the
old" and "the Ilewof todaywill be the old of tomorrow"(al-Sanhuri)(1949),p. 6). It
had been new circumstancesthathadallowedthe Mailisal-dawlato be born:
After the MontreuxTreatyand espeeiallyafterthe eaneellationof the capitulaiions(andafter
the departureof the last EnglishJudieialAdviser),a Mailisal-dawlabecamepossiblein Egypt
and the (:ommitteedrafteda lawin 1939proposingthe establishmentof a Mailisal-dawla,followedby a moreeompletedraftin 1941.(al-Sanhuri,(1950),pp. 2-3)
Then there was trouble. From the momentthe 1941 proposalwas reportedin the
newspapers,"a violentstormof protestarose".
It wasdeseribedas a statewithina state,as a fourthpower,in additionto havinglegislativeand
exeeutiveand judieialpowers, ... it wouldbe a poweraboveaXthe others.... Its powerto
eaneelexecutivedeeisionswouldviolatemixiisterial
responsibilitybeforeParliament,it would
take away the legislaiivesupremacyof the cabinet,. . . it would interferein controversies
betweenministriesand it would siir up the employeesand corruptthe workof agenciesand
authoriiiesof government. . . (And in addiiion)it would trarlscendthe jurisdictionof the
courtsand havepowerlike no otherorganizationeverhadbefore . . . and, it wouldviolatethe
Constitution(!). (p. 28)
The Mailisal-dawlawasnonethelessfoundedin 1945"asan initiativeof the parliament itselft', saysal-Sanhuri)and adds:s<Certainly
therewasgreatcourageshownby
those who introducedthatlaw and supportedit> (pp. 28-29). Whatal-Sanhurisown
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
196
rolewas in the draftingof the law and its final
successis not clear.Therewas, however,a configuration
of personsin poliiicalpostsat the timethatsuggests
al-Sanhuri's
handnot farin the background.Throughout1945
Nuqrashiwasin the governmentas
Saadistprime miriisterof a coaliiioncabinet,and
al-Sanhuriwas Ministerof Education. Al-Sanhurihimselfhad been Deputy Minister
in the Ministryof Justicein
1944,a iime whenthe projectof establishingthe
Mailisal-dawla
wasalmostcertainly
under discussion.Moreover,the successorto
Nuqrashias Saadistprime minister,
IbrahimAbdal-Hadi,wasstillin thatofficewhen
al-Sanhuriwasappointedto the top
postin the Mailis
al-dawla.
Whatevermayhavebeenthe backgroundof the politics
involved,one cannotimaging a posiiionin Egyptat that time moresuitable
for al-Sanhuri'sparticulartalents,
penchantfor creaiionof legalinstitutions,and
long-standing
interestin publiclaw.14
In the wordsof a FrenchIslamiclegalscholar:
He succeeded in giving this institution, still in
its first years of existence, a real independence
vis-a-vis
the government, and made it the symbol of
judicialreform in the country. (ECellefonds,
(1958),p. 476)
Once in the positionof ra'isMaylisal-dawla,he
undertook,to make it into "a
toweringfortressof the protectionof rightsand the
guardianof liberties"(Mursi,
1980).His decisionsin thesecourtsareremembered,
notablyfor:
(1) Furtheringthe right of the administrative
judiciarypowerto exercisesupervision over the constitutionality
of law. "Whilethe judicialpowersupervises
the legislativepower,it does not undertaketo
legislate."Hourever,"if legislation is in oppositionto the constitution,it is its
duty not to apply it" (alQulali,(1972);
(2) Supportingthe freedomof the pressand the
expressionagainstgovernment
ordersto banpublicationsor cancelor denypublishing
licenses;and
(3) Offering legal redress of grievancesfor
those who claimed to have been
wrongedby administrativeor other governmental
aciion (al-Qulali,(1972);
Mursi,(1980).
The establishmentof the rightof judicial
supervisionover the constitutionality
of
laws
was, says al-Sanhuri,"the most importantdecision
that the Egyptianjudiciary
has
issuedin the modernage"(al-Sanhuri,(1950,p. 11)
and"a pointof realtransformaiion
in the positionof the Egyptaincourtsin this
matter,in view of the position
occupied
by the court of the administrativejudiciary
(al-gada'al-idari)"(p. 10).
Although
the decisionwas issuedon 10 February1948,
before
al-Sanhuricameonto
the
court,he immediatelyreinforcedthis newlydefined
competence
of the courtsin
the
first issue (January1950)of the journalof the
Majlisal-dawla,of which he was
lAIn 1949 there was a major revision of the
Mailis al-dawla with which al-Sanhuriseems not tO
have been
happy,
further suggesting that he had had a close
connection with the 1946 law. "Under the law of
hewrites,"the sections of the Egyptian
1946",
Conseild'Etat had links with each other, whereas
the law of 1949
has
not been fortunate in the modifications in this
respect". The changes brought about created
separate
administrative
structures for opinions and legislation on the one hand
and litigation on the other. In doing
this
the 1949 law has, he says, "set up a barrier
between the sections". The Conseilhas thereby "lost
of
itshomogeneity" and "there is no longer the
much
collaborationindispensablebetween the different
sections"
(p.
578).
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
197
editor. Two long articleson the subjectwere containedin this issue and he himself
discussesthe matterat somelengthin his introduciion.
"The right of supervisionover the constitutionalityof laws is not found in the
FrenchConseil
d'Etat,"he writes,but:
if the Frenchjudiciarysiick to old opinionsthatsayit is not permittedfor themto look at the
consiituiionalityof law, we do not have to acceptthese textsin Egypt . . . We must liberate
oulselvesfromthe nooseof iniitaiingothers . . . We see thatthe conveniionsin Francearedifferentfromthoseof Egypt.(p. 12)
He explainsthe matterto a Frenchreadershipsomewhatdifferently:
Althoughthe principleof nonaccountability
of actsof legislativepoweris adIrdtted
in Egyptas
in France,the Conseil
d'Etatof Egypt,in contrastto Frenchjurisprudence,hasrecogriizedthe
rightof examinaiionof constitutionalityof lawsand, a fortion,
of decree-laws,even aftertheir
raiificaiionby the parliament.
The decree-law,beforebeingratifiedby parliament,consiitutesan actof executivepower;thus
the decree-lawcomeswithinthe formalandorganiccompetenceof the EgypiianConseil
dEtat
to annulexecutivedecisions;and thereforeit has authorityto annula decree-lawas it has to
annulall otheradministrative
decrees.(al-Sanhuri,(1952),p. 580)
The authorityto annulexecutivedecreesby an administrativejudiciaryis not synonymous,certainly,with the right to void lawswhichoriginatein the legislature.In
this articlecomparingthe Egyptianand Frenchconseilsd'etatal-Sanhuridoes not,
however,discussthe basis for the extensionof the powerof judicialreviewin Egypt
overlegislativeacts. He tells his Frenchreadership:
That which contributedto asseriingthe supervisionof the constitutionalityof laws is the
absence,in Egyptianlegislaiion,of texts susceptibleof being interpreted,as in France,in a
sensethatforbidsthe judgeto considerconstitutionality.
(p. 580)
The natureof this power,and the reasoningwhichunderliesits assertionis discussed
in the two articlesin the journalof the Mailisal-dawlareferredto above.Al-Sanhuri
summarisesthemin his introduction.
Accordingto al-Sanhuri,the judge'srole is to interpretthe lawsand see that they
are executedonstitutional laws and ordinarylaws. All laws carrythe presumption
of executability.However,if the judgefindstwolawsin conflict(includingthe constitution, which has a certainpresumptionof priority),he cannotapplyboth of them.
He doesnot, however,void one of the laws.He refrainsfromapplyingit to the casehe
is judging."The judgmentlooks firstat the constitutionality
of decree-lawsand goes
fromthere to the constitutionalityof law itselfr'(al-Sanhuri,(1950)pp. 11-13). The
decision,he says, "is long and complex",andhe proceedsto givehis own reasoningas
to what the right rests on. ';Thereis no doubtthat the administrativejudiciarymay
void a decree-lawfor its non-constitutionality."
If we stop there "the matteris simple". However,al-Sanhuriis of the opinionthatthe judiciary whetheradministrative judiciaryor the regularjudiciary has the duty to be the supervisorsof the
constitutionalityof "lawitself:', that is of parliamentary
legislationwhetherthe legislative powerexercisedis strictlydefinedor discretionary,and in regardto both the
formand the substanceof the law.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
198
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
The Makkamatal-naqd(Courtof Cassation)hadactuallyprecededthe administrative courtin issuinga judgmentof the matterbut its rulingon the constitutionalright
was "extemporaneous",
says al-Sanhuri,and then an appealcourtissueda contrary
decision.The latterstatedcategorically
thatthelegislaturewasthe soleauthorityas to
the constitutionality
of its legislation.It is this opinionthatal-Sanhllricounterswhen
givinghis ownreasoningas to the rightand-the dutyof the judicialauthorityto review
the consiitutionality
of laws.
"Thelssueis notwhetherlawis an actof legislativesovereigntyor not, norwhether
the legislatureis using definedor discretionarypower."The fact of the matteris
ratherthat "theadministrative
judiciarydoesnot actuallynullifyadministrative
regulaiions,leavealonelegislaiion.An opponentof a lawmaynot askthe courtto declare
the lawvoid fromits incepiion,but rathermayaskthatit not be applied."Al-Sanhuri
reasoned:
Is it possible for judges to apply legislation when their opinion as to its constitulionality differs
from that of the legislature?The basis of this right (of substituting their opinion for that of the
legislature) is not, however, found in any text of the Egyptian Constitution nor is it a general
principle. Judging the constitutional correctness of legisIation, objectively speaking, is judicial
work. And if it is said that the principle of the separation of powers is violated, it may be
answered: The judiciary exercises supervision over parliament's opinion (about the
constitutionality of legislation) not by initiating legislation as that would be interference with
the legislative power- but by a judicial act.
The applicable constitutional principle is that powers should be exercised in accordance with
the Constitution. The parliament contradicts this principle if it issues legislation that opposes
the Constitution, and rather than apply unconstitutional laws the judges record this violation.
Thus it is permitted that judges look at the constitutionalityof laws-indeed it is their duty tO
do so-in order to prevent application of legislation which, in their estimation, infringes the
constltutlon.
Administrative judges and regular judges are equal in this competence. And if it is said this
reality is not equivalent to an authority to nullify an administrativeorderand certainly not authority to nullify a law) the answer is: It is not nullifying a legislaiive command as the judicial
decision does not nallify the law in quesiion. Rather, the decision limits itself to the impossibility of applying the law in the case at hand. (al-Sanhuri,(1950) p. 15-16)
If this doesnot seemto be the full powerof "judicialreviewX'
it comesclose. Confirmationof the authoritythatthis judicialdecisionconferredon the Egyptianjudiciary
and reinforcementof its independenceof executiveandlegislativepoweris foundin
the factthat,evenafter18yearsof pressureon the judiciaryfromthenewregime)that
regimestill foundit necessaryto establisha specialhighcourtdirectlyunderexecutive
authorityto rule on questionsof constituiionality.The precipitatinginstance)of
course,had been the wholesaledismissalof judgesin the iCmassacre
of the judiciary"
in 1969by an act of the Presidentof the Republic)and the subsequentissuingof a
courtdecisiondeclaringthe executiveactionillegal.
The ConstitutionalCourtestablishedin 1970(althoughin the firstyearsit did not
carrythe title of a constitutionalcourt)remainsoutsidethe regularjudicialstructure,
andits judgesare appointeddirectlyby the executiveandnot pursuantto the advice
of the High JudiciaryCouncilupon which sit membersof the judiciary.However,
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
199
although consetuiional questionsnow are submittedto the ConstitutionalCourt,
issues concerg civil rightsarestill usuallytakento the Majlisal-dawlaby virtueof
its coniinuing funciion as protectorof ciiizens from arbitraryand unwarranted
governmentaction.Thus whereasrefusalto applylaws for reasonsof unconstitutionality is no longerformallypossible,the Mailisal-dawlaretainsits authorityto review
execuiive action, and it continuesto be adviserto both the executiveand the legislature. Laws, before they are submittedto the People'sAssemblytodaymust still be
passedon by the Mailisal-dawla.
The Mailis al-dawlais consideredby someto havea greaterindependencevis-a-vis
executivepowerthan the regularjudiciary,althoughsome of this independencewas
erodedby law in 1972, when the compositionand competenceof the High Judiciary
Collncilwas alteredin regardto judicialappointments.The Mailisal-dawlaretained
its essentialethos, however,and a hard-foughtstrugglein 198X198Shas restoreda
measureof its independencein the appointmentof judgesvis-a-visthe Ministryof
Justice,representativeof executivepower.
Al-Sanhuriheaded the Majlis al-dawla from 1949 until the political "crisis of
March"in 1954. The Wafdgovernmenttriedto put al-Sanhuriout of the Majlis1dawlain 1950,but he foughtbacksaying:
Between me and them (the politicians of the Wafd) is the consiitution and the law of the Mailis
aI-dawla. . . How can I allow the government to deal arbitrarilywith the Mailisal-dawlawhen
it is the body supposed to impose just treatment of people when the governrnentwrongs them?
(Mursi, (1980))
Several of the eulogies reproducea statementascribedto an unnamedEnglish
journalistof the time, who is quoted as saying:"Thereis no judgein Englandlike
himt" (al-Qulali,Mursi,Khattab).
Amongthe chargeslevelledagainsthim was the claimthat his formerpoliticalaffiliation preventedhis taking a posiiion as judge. Al-Sanhurirepliedthat there was
nothingin the Constitutionor the lawsthat forbadehim being presidentof a judicial
bodyafterhavingbeenministerfor a politicalparty)thathe hadseveredhis partyconnectlons and there was nothing that interferedwith his independenceas a judge.
Moreover,he is quoted as saying, "The historyof the Egyptianjudiciaryis full of
namesof judgeswho havebeenministersandaffiliatedwith politicalparties"(Mursi,
(1980). The referencehere, commentsMursi, is obviouslyto Abd Al-Aziz Fahmi,
once head of the Liberal-Constitutionalist
Party,who becamepresidentof an appeals
court and then Presidentof the Courtof Cassation,the highestjudicialofficeof the
regularjudiciary.ls
Al-Sanhuriinauguratedthe publishingof the journalof the Majlisal-dawlain 1950,
andhe wrotea lengthyintroductionexplainingthe backgroundof theMajlisal-dawla,
introducingthe articlesof thatfirstissue and indicatingwhat the journalintendedto
publish in future. It was to have three sections, he said: the first for researchand
15 'Abd al-Aziz Fahmi is remembered today by the legal/judicial professions as Egypt's most eniinent
xudge. He had gone to Paris with Saad Zaghlul, was a member of the drafting commission for the 1923 Constitution, and Minister of Justice. Al-Sanhuri wrote a eulogy to him that was published in the Majallat
Majlisal-dawla
in 1951.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
200
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
studies, the secondto concernconnectionsbetweenjudicialdecisionsand jurisprudence in administrative
law, and a thirdseciionfor documents.He is listed as ratis
al-tahrtr(editor)on the coverof thisfirstissue.
Whenthe revolutioncamein 1952,al-Sanhurisupportedthe FreeOfficersandwas
legaladviserand draftsmanfor the Revolutionary
CommandCouncil,by virtueboth
of the functionof the Mailisal-dawlaas legaladviserto the governmentandhis owr
personalsupportfor the Revolution.
It was the Mailisal-dazvlaunderal-Sanhurithatprovidedthefatwa settingout the
legal foundationfor Decreelaw No. 121of 1952,by siipulatingthe procedureto be
followedwhen the heirto the thronewasunderagefollowingan abdication.Existing
law coveredonly the case of an underaged successorfollowingthe death(not abdication)of the king. Had the latterprocedurebeenfollowed)it wouldhavemeantcalling the Wafdistparliamentbackinto sessionto administerthe constitutionaloathto a
"regencyorganisation".The decree-lawalloweda "temporary
regencyorganisation"
to have the oath administeredby the Councilof Ministers.The 1923Constitution,
Article237 requiredthe PermanentRegencyto take its oath beforethe parliament
(Shakra,(1985))pp.l73-175; esp. 173n.2).l6
The fact of powerafterthe 1952revolutiondid not translateimmediatelyor easily
into anotherbasisof legitimacy.Firstthe parliamentwent, then the parties then the
Constitution.Whilethe old lawsremained,new lawsbecamesuperimposed,and the
independenceof the judiciarybecamesubordinatedtO concernswith the independenceof Egypt. But neitherold lawsnor judiciarycompletelylost theirvitality.The
judiciarywas to resistcooptationas a bodyand only in 1969did the finalonslaught
come, by an executivedecreewhich was challengedand reversedby the judiciary
itself.
Duringthe first 18 monthsof the Revolution,whenal^Sanhuri
was still in placein
the Mailisal-dawla,the old legalitieswerestretchedbut they werenot ignored,and
the Maylisal-dawlabecameinvolvedwithallowingapprovalof the decree-lawrestrictirlg politicalparties. MuhammadNaguib's memoirsindicatethat al-Sanhuriwas
opposedto this lawbut "yieldedto thepersistenceof SulimanHafiz",his deputy?and
the argumentthat "thepartieshavebeencorrupted,whichnegatesthe realmeaning
of parliamentary
democracy".However,al-Sanhurihedgedhis agreementby including the provisothat"thegovernmentwouldnot interfereunlessit wasnecessary. . .
and such interferencewouldbe underthe directsupervisionof the Mailisal-dawla"
(Shakra,(1985), pp.30W301).
Shakratakesthematerialforhis discussionon this issuefrom:7Abdal-FattahHasan,Dhikrayyal
siya(PotiticalMemoires)(Cairo(1974)pp. 137-139);WahidRa'fat,Fusul(Decisions)(Cairon.d.) pp.
12>130); IbrahilnFarag,DhiArayyat
siyasiyya
(PoliticalMemoires)(Cairo(1983)pp. 8>84); 'Abdal'Azim
Ramadan,Nasirwa azmalmaris(NasserandtheCrisisof March)(Cairon.d., pp. 27, 3W31); AhmadHamrush,Qissalthawrat23yulyu(The Storyof the July23rdRevolution)(Cairon.d., p. 235). BothRafat and
Ramadan,it is pointedout, exercisehindsightin criticisingthe Decree-lawof 1952as beinga beginningof
the erosionof constitutional
government.Ra'fathadbeentheheadof theseciionof theMailisal-dawlathat
had issuedthe fatwaon whichthis decree-lawwasbased.Ramadan,Hamrush,andHasanall quoteSuliman Hafiz, al-Sanhuri'sdeputyin the Mailisaldawla) as saying:'I, togetherwith al-Sanhuri,brought
aboutthe victorywe wantedfrom'AliMaher"(quotedin Shakra,(1985),pp. 17S-176).'AliMaher,party
andPalaceintimateandsometimestrongmanof Egyptianpolitics,hadbeeninstalledby the FreeOfficers
as headof a civiliancabinetto runthe government.
16
siLya
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
201
Al-Sanhuriis saidto havebeenworkingon the draftof a newconstitutionfor Egypt
dllringthe earlyperiodof the Revolution,(Gami'i,(1972)). He was known to have
been amongthe proponentsof a returnto consiitutionalrule and continuedto be a
defenderof the Majlisal-dawlaagainstgovernmerltinterference.The issue of return
Comto civilianrulebecamepartof the powerstrugglebothwithinthe Revolutionary
mandCouncil(RCC)andoutside)anderuptedinto whathasgonedownin the history
of Egyptas "theCrisisof March"of 1954.
On 26 March 1954 the Bar Associationhad a turbulentmeetingwheredemands
weremadefor a returnto civiliangovernment.On 29 Marchthe RCCannouncedthat
period"in January1959
it would continueto functionuntil the end of the sCtransition
(Ziadeh (1968), pp. 15S157). On 29 Marchalso, al-Sanhuriwas ousted by force
fromthe Mailisal-dazvla.
Massdemonstrationsertlpted)reachingtheirpeakon 29 Marcharlddemonstrators
surroundedthe buiIdingof the Mailis al-dawlain Giza. Al-Sanhuriwas attackedby
"whohad been misledby biasedinformationcirculatedby
someof the demonstrators
someopportunists",accordingto a statementby the Ministerof Interior.They "drew
blood' and al-Sanhuriwastakenhomeby SalahSalem.Nasservisitedhim laterin the
eveningto checkon his condition(al-Ahram,30 March1954).
It is believedthat "somearmyelements"had incited the mob and instigatedthe
attack(Ziadeh, (1968), p. 156) It is claimedthat the reasonfor the assaulton the
Mailisal-dawlaandal-Sanhuriat thattimein particularwasthe publicationin al-Akhbar(newspaper)that the Mailis al-dawlawas 'saboutto issue deerees(sac)againstthe
Revolueon . . . (and) it had been rumoured that Dr al-Sanhuri was to become Prime
Minister for the four months until the election of a constituent assembly>'(Shakra)
(1985) p. 590). Whatever was fact or fiction from that murky episode, on 16 April
1954:
the names were publishedof 38 leading poliiicianswho, becausethey served as ministers
betweenFebruary6) 1942and July 23, 1952and belongedto the Wafd,Liberal-Constitutionalist)or Saadistparties,aredeprivedof theirpoliticalrightsfor 10 years.(TheTimes,London,
17 April 1954)
They were C'heldto blamefor the stateof corruptionwhichpervadedEgypt7spolitical
life" from the date when the Brltish governmenthad sent tanks to the Palace to
impose a Wafd governmenton King Farouk. Al-Sanhuri'sname was, of course,
amongthem.
XI. SYNTHESIS OF THEORY AND PRACTICE
lNheMajorTreatises
The incidentat the Mailisal-dawla)followedby the decreenamingal-Sanhurias one
of those whose "politicalrights"were taken anvay,effectivelyended his public life.
Thereafter,he workedat homeon al-Wasit,the firstvolumeof whichhadappearedin
1952,and for a time continuedto lectureat the Instituteof High ArabStudies.
He was also called upon to assist with the draftingof moreArabcodes and basic
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
202
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
legislaiion.In 1953he hadgoneto Libyaforthatpurpose,as Libyawantedto abolish
its ItaliaIlcode. In 1959he went eoKuwait,wherehe decidedagainstprovidinga civil
code, but includedmuch of what had constitutedothercivil codes in the Kuwaiti
commercialcode, provideda mantimelaw, a law of compensation,and a law establishingthe primarycourtsw
He alsoworkedon the constitutionsof SudanandBahrain.He was askedlo go to
the UAE to drafttheirfederallegislationbut ill healthpreventedhim fromtravelling
to observelocalcircumstances,somethinghe considerednecessaryfor the draftingof
legislaiion.
Out of his lecturesat the ArabStudiesInstituteon comparative
law cameMasadir
al-haqqji al-fiqhal-islami,a six-partworkwhichis now publishedin two volumes(alSanhuri,(195F1957)).The title, in the wordsof Linantde Bellefonds,whotranslates
it into Frenchas "Lessources
dudroilsubjectif',is "somewhatconfusing".He explains
that it is "a studyof the ruleswhich the free will (volontet)
shouldtakeinto account
whenthatwill is appliedto posiiivelaw (quandcelle-ciestappeleea avoirdeseffiets
jundiques)"(Bellefonds,(1958),p. 477).
The work,continuesBellefonds,is an examinationof a questionthathas engaged
the attentionof modernMuslimjurists,namelyto extracta generaltheoryof legal
actionfromthe dispersedelementsin the greatclassicaltreatiseswhichdo not attempt
to synthesise.Thatwhichdistinguishesal-Sanhuri'sworkfromothersis the manner
(lXespnl)in whichthe workis approached.Thanksto his long experiencein Western
jurisprudence
he has an ability,lackingin otherwriters,to give to legalphenomena)
includingthatof Muslimlaw, a universalandpermanentcharacter,"thoughtby some
to be missingfromMuslimlaw"(p. 477).
Al-Sanhuri,in his prefaceto the Masadiraexplainswhathe means:
Masadiral-haqqare the bases from which right, legally speaking, derives; this right is a benefit
having monetary value (qimamaliyya)which the law protects. We are not concerned here with
public rights or rights connected to personal status because) legally speaking they do not have a
monetary value. We are confining ourselves to rights having monetary value. Such rights are
personal and material, as they are designated in Western jurisprudence. (al-Sanhuri, (1954)>
p. S)
He explainsfurther;
In Western law there is an esseniial distmciion between personal right (al-haqq
al-shakhsi)
and
material right (al-haqqal-'ain29.
It is the spinal column in Western law which derives from
Roman law, and the source of this right, whether personal or material, is the most precise of
subjects, although it is most vague in Western law. We will attempt here to specify them in
Western law and then deal with them in Islc
law. That way we will put Islamic law beside
Western law as regards those features that have central importance ....
We will deal with
Islamic law in the way we deal with Western law to see whether personal and material right in
Islamic law is to be found in the sense known in that Western law which derives from Roman
law, and whether we can attribute all these sources to legal conveyance and legal fact in the
meaning known in Western law. (p. 5)
Bellefonds,bothat the beginningof his reviewof this andagainin closing,recommendsat the workbe translatedso that it "canbe put in the handsof all jurists"
(Bellefonds,(1958),p. 478). Sincethishasnot occurredwe can,perhaps)considerit a
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
203
hereticalnotion.The"heresy"is, of course,to suggestthatbasicareasof concernto
withtheIslamicShari'a,or that
couldbenefitby comparison
Westernjurisprudence
schoin theShan'a,notjustfororientalist
valuable
theremightpossiblybesomething
larsbutforWesternjurists.
workin anotherreview
Bellefondscommentsfurtheron the valueof al-Sanhuri's
throughhasmaintained
writtenwhenthefifthvolumewaspublished.As al-Sanhuri
of justicein
perhapstheremaybeprinciples
comments,
outhiswritings,thisreviewer
legalareas
in corresponding
"morejust"thanprinciples
Islamthatcanbe considered
in thelawsof theWest.
The construciions of the jurists of Islam in the area of agency . . . are not only in advance of the
last stage of Roman law, but in many respects they show themselves superior to the systems
presently prevailing in the West. (Bellefonds, (1959), p. 638)
referredto by Bellefonds
featureof thisworkof al-Sanhuri
Anothernoteworthy
in referenceto this
he says,takesthe opportunity
concernsobligation.Al-Sanhuri,
subject:
to excavate the Muslim notion of usury and indicate its evoluiion, providing a study which is
probably the most valuable that we have on this question;
complexinitsintentionto
remindsus thatMuslimlawis "particularly
andBellefonds
(1958),p. 477).
(Bellefonds,
andillicitprofitin legalrelations"
preventallcharlce
Thematterof usuryin Islamiclawseemsto engendergreatinterestin Islamiclaw
commentsquotedaboveareparticularly
circlesin bothEastandWest.Bellefonds'
interestingin the light of commentson the subjectby anotherscholar,Majid
Khadduri,one who straddlesbothEastandWest.In referenceto howal-Sanhuri
notes:
of "usury"in Islamiclaw,Khadduri
dealtwiththeproblemof theprohibition
Drafting the Iraqi Civil Code, Sanhuri consciously avoided grappling with the problem of interest, partly because it was not dealt with in the Majalla,the code that had been in force in Iraq,
and partly because it would arouse the opposition of scholars who considered it contrary to
Islamic standards. In practice, however, interest had already become part of the economic system, notwithstanding that its use in business trarusactionshad yet to be jusiified. In Egypt, the
situaeon was somewhat different from Iraq as its former civil code, a replica of the French Civil
Code, took interest for granted. (Khadduri, (1984), p. 208)
he
with Islamicstandards"
revisedthe codes "in accordance
Whenal-Sanhuri
havejustifiedinterest"onIslamicgrounds".It is his
to Khadduri,
should,according
continue,agreethat:
didnotdo so. Somepeople,Khadduri
claimthatal-Sanhuri
and interest as a
a distinciion between usury as a transaciion between money lenders (murabin),
transactiorl between economic instituiions. . . and investors must be made. . . Sanhuri,
accepting without hesitaiion the disiinciion between interest and usury, recognized interest but
he failed to provide a raiionale for it. (p. 209)
the matterof the use of Islamiclawfor the civilcodes
Dr Khadduriapproaches
It
withIslamicstandards."
fromthepointof viewof therevisionbeing"inaccordance
purposedoesnot beginto
of al-Sanhuri's
is my contentionthatsucha description
lawwhichhe haddeveloped
of themethodof comparative
thecomplexity
encompass
containsa certaindialectic.
andwithwhichhe wasworking.Hismethod,moreover,
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
204
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
He not only positedIslamiestandardsagainstthe
existingeode, but also included
usage of that eode in Egypt-its interpretationand
applieationby the Egyptian
eourts.In addition,he eonsideredthe mostrecent
innovationsof Westernlegalthinking as it eoneernedthe requirements
for "justiee"of partieular
"modern"eonditions.
In this most sensitivematterof usury/interest
as referredto by the abovementioned
two eommentators
on al-Sanhuri'swork,one eandemonstrate,I believe,
al-Sanhuri's
methodand the distinetionhe makesbetweenthe
"seientifiestage"of workand the
4'legislaiivestage"in the refurbishingof Islamielaw for
moderr;use. The Masadir
representsworkof the "seientifiestage"essentially.There,as
Bellefondsexpressesit,
he "exeavates";thatis, he exploresthe waysin whieh
legalconceptshavebeen dealt
with by varioussehoolsof Islaniielawandthe great
Islamiescholarsof jurisprudence,
how these eoneeptshavebeeomeelaborated,and in
whatwaysthey havedeveloped
and ehangedover the eourseof the eenturiesand from
one legal mind to the next.
Thatthereis a progressionor developmentin thinkingof
the Islamiescholars(if only
by virtueof havingto applyeonceptsto new
circumstanees)
is takenfor granted.In
"exeavations"-archeologieal
or legal-one findseaehsucceedingconstructionbuilt
upon structureswhich were developedpreviously.
The plight of Islamic law in
"moderntimes," as I readal-Sanhuri'sformulationof the
issue, is not thatit didnot
historieally
progressand not thatit cannot,but ratherthatgreatlegal
mindsstopped
workingon legalproblemsin the lightof new circumstances
andthus the law ceased
toevolve.
Therefore,it wouldseem that it is not an issueof "the
theoreticalquestionof the
harmonybetween Western and Islamic legal standards"
that Khadduriclaims
al-Sanhuri
doesnot resolve(p. 209n)but rathera concernwith
turningagainto developingthe Islaniiclegalconcepts,this timein the lightof
new("modern")conditions.
Thatthereis no "harmony"is not the point. We should
not expectthereto be one.
Otherwise
Islamielawwouldnot be distinctiveand"oneof theworld's
greatlegalsystems",and the exereiseof developinga comparative
lawwithinal-Sanhuri'sframeof
referenee
with Islamiclawas a mainpillarwouldhaveno meaning.
Therefore,in orderfor the theoretiealstatusof "usury"to be
grappledwith under
modern
eonditionsone mustunderstandthe variationsof circumstanees
andcontexts
under
whieh it has been dealtwith in the past. If al-Sanhuri
"readilyaceepts"that
"interest"
is distinguishablefrom "usury"then his
excavationspresumablymust
have
shownhim that"interest"neitherhasnor canbe
consideredto be the evolution
of
the eoneeptof "usury,"andthe rationalefor "interest"
restselsewhere.Andthatis
where
the examinationof "modern"systemsenters.
As Bellefondsnotes,eachvolumeof theMasadirhasa
twofold
ation.
Thereis an internalcomparisonbetweenthe doctrinesof comparativeorganisthe differentschools
of
Muslimlaw andrelationshipsbetweenthem,andthena
consideration
of legalconeepts
in "thegreatEuropeanlegalsystems,ancientand
modern"(Bellefonds,(1958),
p.
477).
Some eoneeptsof what eonstitutes"just"legal relations
are the same or similar,
some
different.Some eoneeptsappearin one systemand do not
appearin another.
How
wasRomanlawglossedandlaterrevisedforuse in the
European
eodes?A study
of
modernlegalsystemsmoreoverimpliesa coneernwithhow
these statesdealtwith
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
205
theirown "legislativestage".Usuryandinterestare
distinguishedin modernWestern
law;usurywas condemnedby bothhistoricalsystems.The
recordof whereandwhen
and how the distinciionappearedin those systemsand
whereit has, is the stuff of
whichal-Sanhuri's"comparative-historical
method"is composed.
The Masadir,as the recordof al-Sanhuri'sworkin his
prescribed"scientificstage",
is colossalin scope:
Rarelyaremodernscholarsof jurisprudence
emboldenedto comparethe Muslimsystemto that
of other civilizaiions.The gulf separaiingthem appears
too large.It takesall the learriingof
al-Sanhurito succeedin construciinga bridgebetweenthem.
(Bellefonds,(1958),p. 478)
The "bridge"as should be noted, is not "harmony",as
such but identificationof
theoreticaland actuallegal relationshipsand conceptsof
lawr of justice---which
eachreflects.Comparisonon a basisof theoryis an entirely
differentpropositionthan
casuisticcomparisons.And it is the formerwherein is to
be found the core of
al-Sanhuri'smethod. Al-Sanhuri'swork on the moderncodes
had indeed, as Bellefondsnotes, "servedhim well" (p. 478). It certainly
sensitisedhim to the matterof
theoreticalstructuresunderlyingisolated legal concepts and
thereforeconnecting
them.
Then thereis the matterof the rich detailthat has been
producedin the courseof
thedevelopmentof theory.
Mostmodernwriters,when dealingwith the classical
writers,arenot able, as al-Sanhuriis, to
separate
sharplybetweenthat which is their own innovaiionand that
which has been taken
fromelsewhere.If one day this work is translatedthe
Westernreaderwill be amazedby the
richness
of informationconcernlng,notably,developments
pointedout by the authorin German,Roman, Latin, etc. legal systems,that his methodof
discoveringrelationshipswith the
Muslim
systemhaveled him to study.(p. 478)
Wherethe Masadirrecordsthe dialecticbetweenancientand
modern,Easternand
Western
legal systems,al-Wasitcontainsanotherkind of dialectic,
or rather,a new,
more
advanced,synthesisof theoryand practicethat the new Civil
Codeof Egyptand
by extensiorlthoseof otherArabstates represents.
Al-Sanhurihad been working on the synthesis of theory and
practice, in fact,
throughout
his life, and his work had a pattern.As he tells us in the
introductionto
thefirst volume of al-Wasit, it is the middle work
between the summarywork
(al-Waiiz)
andthe fullyelaboratedwork(al-Mabsut).Perhapsthe title
is best rendered
Middle
Commentazy.
But thereneverwas a mabsat.Al-Sanhuriis quotedas
sayingin 1968:
Al-Wastl
becamemoreelaboratedthan I had anticipated.I wanted
but
it becarnethe long elaboraiion.I do not believethereis
it to be of mediumlength
morein me. (Mursi,l9SO))
It
forms,however,thecomprehensivetreatiseon Egypt'scivil
law, writtenby the person
who was most knowledgeableby far as to the meaning
and intentionof the provisions
of the new code, how andwhy it hadbeenset out in the
wayit had, andhow it
should
be interpreted;how it wasuniqueandindependentas a
code,
andhow the civil
law
of Egyptbecame,in a word, Egyptianised.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
206
It is possibleto tracehow he hadbegunpreparingthisworkfromhis firstwritings
in Arabic.He tells us in the introduciionof al-Mujiz (1938)thathe hadnot intended
to issue the mujiz until after he had come out with the mabsut)for which he had
alreadybroughtout the first part, Nazanyyalal-aqd in 1934. However,he was to
decidethatthe need fora mujizwas at leastas great.He hadin mxnd,he says,"a concisevolume,not anabridgement,to makeit detailedbutwithoutelaboraiion,to meet
generalneedsas well as thoseof the judiciary".Becausehe wasparticularly
cognisant
of the needs of the latter, "many judicialdecisionswere includedin the notes",
althoughhe restrictedhimself "to Egypiiancourt decisions")that is, to what he
believedwasneededby the practitionerof law.
Thereis no differencebetweenthe two books(Nazanyyatal-'aqdandal-Mujiz)exceptthatin
the abridgementthe issueshavebeenmademoreconcise.Whoeverreadsal-Mujizcanproceed
to ffie mabsutwhich is moredetailed.The maiiz pavesthe way for the mabs1lt.
(al-Sanhuri
(1938c),p. 1)
In 1966he publishedanothershortenedversion,al-Wajiz,l7 whichis the firstthree
books of al-Wasitsummarised.In it, however and this is how it primarilydiffers
fromthe mujiz the theoryof obligationsin Egypiianjurisprudence
is revisedaccording to the changesin the newCivilCode.
In these volumes'Abd al-Razzaqal-Sanhuri scholar,law-giver,and jurist has
producedfor Egyptandthe worlda scholarshipof comparative
jurisprudence
on civil
law unrivalledin breadthand scope, whereinIslamiclaw is prominentlyfeatured,
dealtwith in termsof theoryand as contemporary
practice,andis placedbesideand
treatedon a parwith "thegreatlegalsystemsancientandmodern".
But theworlddoesnot knowabouttheseworks,andfewin Egyptindicatethatthey
realise,otherthanin verygeneralterms,whattheycomprehend.
XII.
THE LEGAL TERRAIN
OF ARAB UNI-TY
Towardsan ArabCivilCode
Whereastherehas beenan altnostcompletescholarlysilencein Egypton al-Sanhuri)
anarticlehe publishedin 1962aboutthe possibilityof a uniformArabcivil code has
occasionedrecentcommentin a paperby Tariqal-Bishri)an Egyptianscholarand
authorwho is alsoa seniorjudgein theMailisal-dawla.This paper(al-Bishri)( 1985))
considers"the legalquestionn'as regardsthe statusof the IslamicShari'aversusthat
ofthe positivelaw. It was presentedat a colloquiumon "The HeritageandContemporaryChallengesto the ArabNation"held in CairoduringSeptember1984under
theauspicesof the Centerfor ArabUnityStudies.The applicationof IslaniiclawconL7 Al-waiizandal-mujiz
havealmostthe samemeaIiing:"summary"
or "outline"or a synonymthereof,
indicating
a shortenedor abbreviated
work
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
207
tinues to be an issue in contemporaryEgyptianpolitics, while "the heritage"(alturath)is a topic of researchand discussionengenderingmuch interestin Egypt's
intellectualcircles.
In his introductionto al-Wasit
al-Sanhurihadexpresseda hopethatthe time would
come when the juristsof the Arabcountrieswould co-operatein producingan Arab
civil code "underpinnedby Islamicjurisprudence
andthe lawsof all the countriesthat
haveparticipatedin the Arabcivtilization"
(al-Sanhuri,(1952)w). In 1962he wrote:
I believethatArabunityis a naturalthingas the Arabpeoplesareone naiion;. . . the strongest
supportof Arabunity is culturalutiity,and the most importantbasisfor unifyingcultureis a
unifiedlegalculture.(al-Sanhuri,(1962),p. 7)
To knowwhatmaybe possiblefor developmentin the future"athoroughstudyof the
pastis necessary"andthen, "anexaminationof the present"(p. 7). In his detailingof
the task ahead,thereare strongechoesof the projectfor the futurehe had outlined
more than35 yearsearlierin Le Califat.
The "thoroughstudy of the past" that al-Sanhurirecommendsin 1962 has two
aspects, which in turn are each dividedinto stages:(1) a study of the "foundingof
Islamicjurisprudence",first "in the ages beforethe time of the foundingof the four
mainschools'X,then "a considerationof the traditionalviewsand the differenttrends
in legal thirlkingincludingthe rules underlyingthe work of the Islamicjurists";(2)
then comes the workof comparativestudyof the differentschools,not only the four
main ones, but othersas well "to ascertainwhatis similarand whatdifferentin legal
thinking".Then comesthe workof comparingthem with modernWesternjurisprudence:
to see wherethe Islamicjuriststoppedin developingthe law,whetherin thebasicrulesor in the
detailedprovisions.Thenthesedetailsshouldbe developedon the basisthatthe Islamicjurists
setn using their wording,style and logic. When Islamic jurisprudenceneeds development)
develop it, but when it conformsto the civilizaiionof the presentage, leave it as it is. (pp.
27-28)
Such studieswill be arduous,he says, and will take "scoresof years"beforethere
can be "a renaissancelike that which occurredin Romarllaw", so that Islamiclaw
"willbe suitableforthe modernage"(p. 28). He emphasisesthatsuchan activitydoes
not involve simply takingpreceptsof Westernlaw and "tryingto make them come
from Islamiclaw or claimingthatWesternlaw is Islamiclaw"(p. 29).
This articleindicatestwothings. Firstly,al-Sanhurihasremainedfirmin the essentials of both the task aheadand the methodfor makingthe Shan'a"suitablefor the
modernage". Secondly,it also indicatesthat al-Sanhuridoes not considerhimselfto
have completedthe task as specified.There is still plenty of work remainingto be
done by others.
The "past"as al-Sanhurispecifiesit, also includesthe experiencesof Arab countries. Thereare threesituations:
(1) thosestateswhichcontinuedwith an "unwritten"
(i.e. uncodified)versionof the IslamicShari'a(SaudiArabiaand Yemen);(2) those
stateswhichwereunderOttomancontrolduringthe secondhalfof the l9th century,
where the Majallawas applied(Syria,Palestine,East Jordan,Iraq and Libya) and
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
208
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
wherethis law remainedthe civil law afterthe fall of the Ottomanempireand the
adventof the Frenchand Britishmandates(andin the case of Libya, Italianrule).
OI11Y
Lebanon,he says,changedits civillawtOonepatternedon the Frenchcode;and
(3) thosestateswhichborrowedFrenchlaw (Egypt,Lebanon,Tunisia,Algerianand
Morocco)(pp. W10). The implicaiionhereis thatthereis not suchgreatlegaldiversity in the Arabworldas mightbe assumed.Moreover,priortOthe l9th century,he
pointsout, uncodifiedIslamicjurisprudence
wasappliedthroughouttheregion(p. 8).
In termsof legal reform)says al-Sanhuri,the Arabworldhas passedthroughtWO
stages:(1) the codification-albeitpariial-of Islamiclaw concerningcivil malters
(whichhe specifiesas concerningfinancialtransactions(muXamalat
al-maliyya)and
coveringrealand personalrights)in the codificationsof theMajallaand the Murshid
al-hayran;
and(2) the new civil codesof EgyptarldIraq.This secondstageconstitutes
"thepresent"for al-Sanhuri,in termsof boththeoryandpractice.
The Iraqi code takes the Majallaas its main source,supplementedwith several
recentlyenactedIraqilaws (mainlythe LandLawandotherlawsregardingproperty
rights)and is closerto the Shari'athanis the EgyptianCivilCodewhich took as its
basicstartingpointthe old Egyptiancivilcodes.However,the newEgyptiancodewas
neededfor the Iraqicodeto be completed.The new Egyptiancodeservedas a model,
al-Sanhurisays, in termsof the divisionsusedto organisethe Iraqimaterial,and for
the additionallegalrulesneededto fillin certainareasof thecivillaw,textsweretaken
fromthe Egyptiancode(pp. 1g20).
It should be rememberedthat in his initialeffortsto producea new Iraqicode
(suprapartV) al-Sanhurihadbegunwitha synthesisof "modernWesterncodes",and
hisworkon thesecodeshadbeencompletedby the timehe returnedto de Iraqicode
in 1943afterhis completionof the draftof the Egyptiancode. By the sametoken,his
workon the Iraqicode, togetherwithhis scholarship
andteachingof comparativelaw
usingthe Majallaand the Murshid,had providedhim the basis for his workon the
Islamiclaw provisionsin the Egyptiancode. The experiencesgainedfromhis initial
workin Iraq,commentsthe abovementioned
Egyptianscholar:
openedIslaniicjurisprudence
for him as it hadnot beenopenedfor him before, . . . therehe
wasconfrontedwiththe problemsof its applicaiions,anditS intricacies,procedures,andinstrumentaliiies.(al-Bishri,(1985),p. 633)
The Iraqicode, saysal-Sanhuri,was"thefirstmoderncodeto jointogetherIslamic
jurisprudence
and modernWesternlaw on an equal basis", and it was "the most
importantexperiencein moderncivil codificaiion"(al-Sanhuri,(1962), p. 24). The
newIraqicode therefore"takesgreatstrides"in al-Sanhuri's;'secondstage".
Init we put togetherthecodifiedprovisionsof theIslamiclawandset thembesideWesternlaw,
asrepresentedin the new Egyptiancode " . . and this pavesthe way for the thirdand final
stage,the re-birthof Islamicjurisprudence)
. . . for the daywhenthis jurisprudence
becomes
thesourcefor moderncilrilprovisions,whenit becomesas well-adaptedtO the currentsof the
civilizaiion
of the presentage as the mostmodernandprogressive
codes. (pp. 22-23)
Beforethis can happen,however,the detailedworkof developingIslarnicjurisprudence(indicatedabove)must takeplace.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
209
Islamiclawis asmuchanarchaiclawasis Romanlaw,butit is nolessprecisein itslogic,orin
orin beingableto develop.(p.23)
of expression,
strength
The outlinesof the futuredialecticarethus ableto be detected,if al-Sanhuri'sspecificationsarefollowed:Islamiclegal theoryversusWesternlegalrules,andwhen the
Westernrulesreflecta differentunderlyingtheorythey areto be eliminatedand new
rulesput in theirplace,rulesthatarereflectiveof Islamiclegaltheory.
The goal towardswhichI an strivingis that therewill be an Arabcivil codederivedprimarily
fromthe IslaIIiicShari'a.(p. 23)
In light of the fact that al-Sanhuri'swork would seem to straddiethe two issues
which, morethananyothers,energisescholarshipand politicsin Egyptand the Arab
world - Arabunity andeheapplicationof Islamiclaw-the virtualoblivioninto which
al-Sanhuri'swork has fallen may, perhaps,seem surprising.Certainlythe political
showdownwith the leadersof the 1952Revolutionoverthe sanctityof the judiciary
and the returnto a rule of law and constitutionthatendedhis publiclife in 1954has
hadsomethingto do withthis. But thereis also, it wouldseem,anotherconsideration.
Fromhis earliestwritingson the Caliphate,throughouthis laterscholarshipandcode
draftings,al-Sanhuri'swork had a determinedsecularorientation.He consistently
maintainedthat Islamas civilisationis separablefromIslamas religion,and that the
developmentof Islamicjurisprudenceconcernedthe former.
Al-Sanhuri'ssecularismcertainlydiffersfromthat of someonelike 'Abd al-Raziq.
In the contextof the debateof the 1920s(suprapartIII) 'Abdal-Raziqmaintainedthat
the Caliphatehad no basisin law, while al-Sanhuripresentedthe Caliphateas partof
the public law of Islam. However, presenttrendswhich call for the renewedapplicationof Islamiclaw, generallydo not acceptthatIslamiclaw can be separatedfrom
religion.Exemplifyingsuch trends,Tariqal-Bishriremarks:
To the end, the matterfor him remainedstrictlydefinedwithinthe frameworkof pure,unconwith religionand its sources
without conneciingthis jurisprudence
taniinatedjurisprudeIlce,
andoriginsin the Koranandthe Sunna.(al-Bishri,(1985),p. 633)
The chargeof not connectingIslamicjurisprudencewith religionis certainlycorrect. Nothing additionalabout this needs to be said. But that he was operatingin a
unconnectedwith its sourcesin the Koranand Sunna,
realmof "purejurisprudence"
I believe, is not tenable,inasmuchas thatis preciselyfromwherethe IslamicShurina,
as developedby the legalscholarsof Islam,originallyderives.
This complaintconcerningal-Sanhuris secularbias does, however, signify the
dominantapproachto the revivalof Islamiclaw todayand why it is often associated
Fundamentalism semanticallyandactually-signiwith "Islamicfundamentalism".
fies goingbackto origins.In the contextof Islamiclaw, it meansignoringthe centuries of legal developmentand the jurisprudenceof the scholarsin favor of direct
nterpretatlono t zeorlgma sources.
The fundamerltalistapproachis for the masses, the methodof al-Sanhuriis for
those learnedin the law. Our age is for the masses,not for jurist-scholars,and that
perhapsis the real reason why one eulogy to al-Sanhuriwas entitled: "The Man
WhomWe Forgot"(Gami'i,(1972)).
.
.
.
.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
210
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
EPILOGUE
ISLAMIC
LAW AND CIVIL
CODE
Recent Developments
'Abd al-Razzaqal-Sanhurimay have been relegatedto the statusof minorpolitical
actor,half forgotten,by the historicalmemoryof Egypt. The CivilCode, however,
remainsthe basiclaw of Egypt, and al-Sanhuri'smulti-volumedcommentaryis still
the authoritative
basisfor its interpretation.
The issue of islamicisingthe laws, however,is also verymuchpartof the present
scene.Althoughmoreor less dormantduringthe 1950sand 1960s,theissuewasto reemergeat the beginningof the 1970s.Inevitably,the questionof the Islamiccontent
of the CivilCodealsoappeared.
Firstcamea new consiitutionin 1971,the firstconstitutionin Egypt'smodernhistorywhichprovidedexplicitlythat"theShari'ais a principalsourceof (Egypt's)law"
(ARE,(1985a),p. 998;Habachy,(1985),p. 105).In 1971,however,constitutionalism
was at a low ebb, andlittle attentionwas paidat the timeto the particularinnovation
in Article2. Al-Sanhurihad, afterall, includedsimilarlanguagein the firstarticleof
the CivilCode.Then therewas a movementon threefronts:The constitutionality
of
the CivilCodewaschallengedin the courts,committeesof theMailisal-sha'b(parliament) begandrafting"Islamiccodes", and Article2 of the 1971Constitutionwas
amended.
The constitutionalissue derivedfroma casewhichwas broughtbeforethe Majlis
al-dawlaby one, FuadGudah,againstal-AzharUniversityto collectanunpaiddebtof
someLE 592, beingthe balanceowedon the priceof surgicalinstrumerlts
suppliedto
the Facultyof Medicine.The courtheld for the plaintiffanddirectedal-Azharto pay
the amountowingtogether
withinterestat therateof 4 percent.The Rectorof al-Azhar
appealed.In the courseof the appealproceedings,the constitutionality
of Article226
of the CivilCodewaschallenged.Article226specifiesthatinterestshallbe chargedon
debtsfromthe datea judicialclaimis submitted.In the pleaof non-constitutionality
it
was contendedthatArticle226 was in conflictwith the Shan'asince the Shan'a forbids the paymentof riba(usuallytranslatedas "interest").In its sessionof 3 April
1978the High AdministrativeCourtsuspendedits hearingsand sent the case to the
Constitutional
Court(ARE,(1985a),p. 993).
Also in 1978,in its sessionof 17 December,the Mailisal-sha'bpasseda resolution
forniinga specialcommitteeto study proposalsfor applyingthe rulesof the Shari'a
andfor theircodification(ARE,(1982),p. 33).18On 20 June 1982specialcommittees
wereformedto reviewthe workof the committeesforcodifyingtheShan'a.On 1 July
1982reportsof specialcommitteeswere subrIiittedtogetherwith draftcodes which
were on that date referredto the Legislativeand ConstitutionalCommittee(ARE,
(1982),pp. 3241; ARE, (1985b),p. 35). The draftcodeswereprintedas appendices
to the transcriptof thatsessionof theMailisandincludedthe following:
18 There was an indication by Mumtaz Nassar, speaking in the Mailisal-sha'b,
4 May 1985, however,
that work in this direction of some kind may have begun earlier:"Since 1976 the Mailis(al-sha'b)
began the
preparationof studies with the formation of committees and gathering materials, a number of the studies
which . . . (concerned) legislating the Shari'ain all the texts of the present laws". (ARE, (1985b), p. 18)
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
211
Draft Law of CivilTransactions(morethan 1,000articles);
-- Draft Law of Evidence(181 articles);
Draft Law of Liiigation(513 ariicles);
Draft Law of CriminalPenalties(635 articles);
-Draft Law of MaritimeCommerce(443 ariicles);
-Draft Law of Commerce(776 ariicles);(1985b),p. 19)19
No furtheractionwas takenin the Mailisuntil4 May 1985.
Meanwhile,in May 1980 the Constitutionof 1971 was amended.Passedby the
Majlisal-sha'bandsllbmittedto referendumon 22 May 1980the languageof Article2
of the 1971Constitution henceforthwas to read:
Islamis the religionof the StateandArabicis its officiallanguage.Islamicjurisprudence
is the
principalsourceof legislation.(ARE, (1980),p. 7) (emphasisadded)
The purposeof this amendment,said the specialcommitteewhich had draftedthe
amendmentin a reportsubmittedto andapprovedby the Mailisal-sha'bin July 1979,
was "to requiretheMailisal-shanb,when seekinga ruleof law, to haverecourseto the
rulesof the Shan'a to the exclusionof anyothersystemof law"andin orderto insure
that "legislationdoes not contradictthe foundationsand generalprinciplesof the
Shari'a"(quotedin ARE, (1985a),p. 997). The GeneralCommitteeof the Majlisalshab in a reportapprovedon 15 September1981was morespecificas to the meaning
of the amendment:
This amendrnentmeansthatit is no longerpossiblein the futureto enactanylegislationwhich
contradictsthe rulingsof Islamiclaw. It alsomeansthe necessityof reviewingthe lawswhich
werein effect beforethe applicationof the Constitutionof 1971and the amendingof them to
bring them into conformitywith the rules of the Shari'a.(quoted in ARE, ( 1985a),
p. 998/Habachy,(1985)p. 105)
However,the Reportcautionsthat:
thechangefromthe legalsystempresentlyexisiingin Egypt, . . . tOa completelyIslamiclegal
systemwill requirepatienceandproceedingwith the utmostcareas regardspracticalconsiderations.... If the legal system in its entiretyis to be changed,a suitableperiodof iime is
neededto allowthe compilationof theselawsandto organizethemwithinthe frameworkof the
Koranand Sunna)and the opimonsof the Muslimjurists.(p. 998/p. 105)
On4 May 1985, the decisionof the ConstitutionalCourtin the al-Azharcase was
announced.Simultaneously,the Mailisal-sha'bwas debatingthe matterof the applicationof the Shan'a in Egypt.
In rejectingthe pleaof the non-constitutionality
of Article226 of the CivilCodethe
Courtsaid:
Onlythe legal enactInentsissued afterthe cominginto effect of the obligationto conformto
IslamicLaw areaffected;. . . legalenactmentswhichante-datedthe amendmentarenot affectedby the obligaiionto conformbecausethey werein existencebeforethat limitationbecame
duefor implementaiion.(p. 9971p. 104)
19As surrunarised
by DeputySheikhSalahAbuIsma'ilduringthe debateof 4 May1985.Althoughthese
draft
codesappearedas partof the proceedingsof theMailisal-sha'bandbeartheirimprint,circulationhas
beenextremelylimited.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
212
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
The "truepurposeof the 1980amendmentto Article20 of the Constitution",saidthe
Court,is that it is intendedto be "a limitationon the powerof the legislaliveauthority"as to the sourcesfromwhichit shoulddrawits rulesof law(p. 999/p. 105).
Otherwise,the implicationwould be that "all past legislationwhich contradicts
Shari'aprinciplesshouldbe scrapped",said the Court,and such a situationwould
"clearlyleadto contradictions
andconfusionin the judicialprocessin a mannerwhich
wouldthreatenstability".Moreover:
hadthe legislatorof theConsiituiionwantedto incorporate
theprinciplesof theShari'a
into the
Consiituiionspecifically,or had he intendedthat these principlesbe enforcedby the courts
withoutthe need to formulatethemas specificlegislaiivetextsaccordingto the set procedures
of the Consiituiion--hedid not lackthe authorityso to provide,clearlyandexplicitly.(p. 999/
p. 105-106)
However,restrictingtheapplicabilityof the constitutional
amendmentto futurelegislation "does not exemptthe legislatorfrom responsibilityfor the past laws", continuedthe Court,especiallythose "in contradiction
to the principlesof the Shari'a".
It is, moreover,the legislator'sresponsibility"to takethe initiativein siftingout any
infringementof the aforementionedprinciplesfrom the texts of these laws". Ultimately,in orderthattherebe harmonybetweenpastandfuturelegislation,"theyall
mustagreewith theseprinciples"(pp. 999-1000/p.106).
In assessingthe significanceof this decision,SabaHabachy,friendandcontemporary of al-Sanhuri,has highlightedtwo featuresfor particularcomment.In denying
retroactiveeffect to the amendmentto Article2 andinterpretingthe changeto mean
that the Sharinais to be the main sourceoffuturelegislation,"the responsibilityfor
implementingArticle2 of the Constitutionas amended(has been) shiftedfrom the
judicialto the legislativeauthority"(Habachy,(1986),p. 240). He aIsonotesthatthe
Courthasquoteda "significantphrase"frompreparatory
reportsconcerningthe proposedamendmentto Article2 of the Constitution.Thisphrasedeprecates:
the changefrom the presentlegal systemof Egyptwhichgoes backmorethanone hundred
yearsandits replacementby a completesystemof Islarniclaw.
The sourceof the quotedlanguageis the Reportof the GeneralCommitteeof theMajlis al-sha'bat the time the Amendmentwasbeingconsidered(seeabove).The Court,
commentsDr Habachy,"recognises. . . the necessityof changeof lawin the Shan'a
accordingto the requirementsof timeandplace"(p. 240).
The languagequoted by the Court,referredto above, carriesthe furtherimplication,of course,thatthe presentlegalsystemis alsopartof Egypt'slegalheritage.
But the primesignificanceof this decision,althoughbasedon a legal technicality
and addingnothingto the "centuries-oldargument"concernint,interest,is, for Dr
Habachy,"that it has saved, not merelyArticle226, but the entire new Egyptian
Codeof ProfessorSanhuriof whichthe articlein questionis a part"(p. 240).
The savingof al-Sanhuri'sCivilCodewith one fell swoopof the judicialpen went
largelyunnoticedbecause,on the sameday, Egypt'sConstitutional
Courtannounced
anotherdecision,anxiouslyawaitedfor manymonthsand muchmorepublicised.It
was a case concerningfamilylaw, also broughtas a constitutionalchallengeon the
strengthof the amendedArticle2 of the Constitution,this timeto the PersonalStatus
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
AL-SANHURI AND ISLAMIC LAW
213
Lawof 1979("Jihan'sLaw")whichwasdeclaredunconstitutional.
This lawhaddone
suchunspeakably'Cun-Islamic''
thingsas allowa divorcedwife to continueto live with
her childrenin the apartrnent
of marriage,andgive a wife the rightto applyfor a divorce when her husbandmarriedanotherwoman.20The Egyptian
generalpublicwas
at that momentin historyconsiderablymoreinterestedin
apartments)divorcesand
polygamousmarriagesthanin the savingof the CivilCode.
Nor was there, generallyspeaking,public consciousnessof the
debatethat same
day in the Maylisal-sha'bon the same issue the meaningof
the Constitutions
amendedArticle2. The MailisaZ-shaXb
debatetook placepursuantto the submission
in that session of the Reportof the Committeeon Religious
and SocialAffairs,the
thirdsectionof whichwasentitled,<'Revision
of the lawsinsofaras theyarein contradictionwith the rulesof theShari'a'.The Reportinterpretsthe
constitutionalamendment as meaning:
that the present
laws should be reviewed in stages, in a
scieniific manner, and those features
that contradict
the principles
of the Shan'a, a matter on which all parties
and political
Orlentat1ons agree.
revised
.
.
Whenthe presentlegislativetexts arereviewed:
what is not in contradiction
with the principles
of the Shan'a should be left alone, while that
which does contradict the rules and principles of
the Shari'ashould be revised) having concern
for legisIative stability, and the judicial and
jurisprudential
heritage; and t}}e revisions should be
in harmony with the condiiions
of society. (ARE, (1985b), p. 13)
TheReportspeaksof the CivilCodeas <'thebasiclawand support
of the legalsystem
ofthe State"and refersto a decisionof the Makkamat
al-naqd
(Courtof Cassation)in
itssessionof 27 July 1980:
which affirmed
that the rules of the present Civil Code were
enacted after lengthy study and
reflection. Morever) the majority of them have their
origin in the rules of the Shan'a, except in
afew rare instances,
as is confirmed in the explanatory
memorandum
(of the Code) where the
origin of these rules in Islartiic jurisprudence
is stated
. .: (Therefore)
there is no need to
revise the rules of the present civil law; it is
enough to amend the texts that conflict with the
Shan'a.(p. 14)
Anumberof deputiesspoke. Commentsrangedfrom
expressionof supportfor the
partof the Report that spoke of the applicationof Islamic
legislationnot requiring
abolition
of all otherlaws)to the callingof attentionof the deputiesto the
factthatthe
draft
Islamiccodeshadbeenlanguishingin committeesince 1982.All
attestedto their
support
for the Shari'aandseveralspokeof the ;'purification
of the laws"
The governmenthada positionpaperon the issue,andat the close
of the debatethe
Government's
communicationwas read. Therewere six points, the generalsense of
which
is as follows:
(1) Egypt's legal system is one of stable laws which have
their basis in the
Shan'a)the CivilCodebeinga good example;
The decision of unconstitutionality was, however, based on
technical rather than substantive grounds.
The
Court said in its opinion that reform of family laws was not
of sufficient urgency to justify the use of
exceptional
presidential decree-law powers delegated by the legislature for use
in emergeneies or while the
Mailis
al-shayb
wasin recess.
20
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
214
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
(2) The judiciaryin Egyptis firmlyestablishedwithits system
embeddedin the
constitutionandthe lawswhichagreewiththe principlesof theShan'a;it
wouldbe
no smallmatterto rebuildsucha systemandmuchof valuein
pasteffortswouldbe
destroyedin the process.Thereforeit is preferableto work on
developingwhat
alreadyexists,accordingto the Shari'a;
(3) The principlesof the Islamicreligioncall for a societyof
equality,justice,
sufficiency,toleranceandotherqualitiesof whichwe canbe justlyproud
in frontof
the wholeworld;andourworkis to assuresucha society;
(4) There is consensuson the principlesof the Shan'a
concerningcivil transactions;only in somedetailsis therecontroversy,andthe
controversial
issuesmust
be studiedcarefully;
(5) Egypt has never been isolated from the world and
interactswith what
happenstodaythroughoutthe world;we must find waysto surmount
the present
burdensof ourinternational
commoditytransactions
(amountingto morethanfifty
per cent of GNP), so thatwe maybenefitfromthem;
(6) All sects of Egyptiansocietyacceptdrawingour legislation
fromthe Sharina
and the applicationof Shan'aprinciplesconcerningsuch things
as utility, necessity, andthe avoidanceof harm.(ARE,(1985b),p. 35)
Amotionto approvethe Reportof the Committeeon Religious
andSocialAffairsand
thestatementof the Governmentwas passedby a showof
hands.A motionto bring
thedraftcodespresentlyin the LegislativeandConstitutional
Committeeto the floor
wasnot submittedto a vote because,the Speakerexplained"yet
again",therewere
presentlyno draftlaws or proposalsfor draftlaws beforethe present
sessionof the
Assembly,any suchmattersbeforea previoussessionhavingdiedwith
the endingof
thatsession.If any memberwishedto submitproposalsfor draft
laws, he must first
"clearthe road" of the restrictionsprescribedby the
parliamentaryprocedures
(p.35).
That is wherethe matterpresentlyrests.Actionon substitute
codesis in abeyance,
"Dral-Sanhuri'sCivil Code"remainsthe basiccivil law of
Egypt, and the present
governmentthe executiveand the legislature has given formal
recognitionto the
effortsof al-Sanhurito constructa law that would be in accord
with the Shan'ain
spirit
andin as manyparticularsas "modernconditions"permitted.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson,J N X, "TheShari'aandCivHLaw",IslamicQuarterly
(1954)1(1)pp.2946.
'Allam, MuhammadMahdi, '<al-Sanhuri")
al-MaJma'unh khamsinamin (publicaiionof
Maima al-lughaal-'arabiyya,
cairQ
(1986),
pp. 15>160.
ArabEncyclopedia(al-Mawsu'aal-arabiyaal-mtlyassara)
"Al-Sanhuri",Beirut(1965),p. 1024.
ArabRepublicof Egypt(ARE), The 1980Constitution
of theArabRepublicof Egypt(afterthe
amendmentsraiifiedin the 22 May 1980referendum),Cairo(1980), StateInformationService.
ArabRepublicof Egypt(ARE),Madba£at(transcriptof) Mailisel-shanb,70th Session)1 July
1982,(1982),pp. 3241.
ArabRepublicof Egypt(ARE), High ConstitutionalCourt.Decisionin CaseNo. 20, Judicial
YearNo. 1 (4 May 1985)- CaseNo 7, JudicialYearNo. 9 of the HighCourt:.al-7arzdaalrasmiyya20 (16 May 1985)(1985a),pp. 992-1000.
ArabRepublicof Egypt(ARE),MadbatalMailisal-sha'b,74th Session,4 May 1985(1985b),
pp. 13-35
Basdevant-BastidSuzanne,sCl'Institut
de droitcomparede Lyon",RecueildXeludes
enlthonnezlr
d'EdouardLambertvol.
1 Paris:L.G.D.J. (1938),pp. 11-15.
Bellefonds,Y Linant de) "Abd al-Razzakal-Sanhuri:Masadiral-Haqfil Fiqh al-Islami",
(BookReview)RevueIntentationale
deDroitCompare,10( 1958D,pp. 476479.
Bellefonds,Y Linantde, Id. 11 (1959),pp. 633-639.
Bishri, Tariq al-, "al-Mas'alaal-qanuniyyabayn al-sharina
al-islamiyyawaI-qanunal-wadi"
(The Legal QuestionBetweenthe IslamicShan'a and PosiiiveLaw), in al-SayyidYassinet
al.,al-turath
wa-lahdiyat
al-'asrfi
al-watenal-' arabi(The HeritageandContemporary
Challengesin the ArabNation)Beirut(1985),pp. 617-644.
Castro)Francesco)"'Abd al-RazzaqAhrnadal-Sanhuri(1895-1971):priIriiappunciper llna
biografia",Studi tn onoredi FrancescoGabrielinel suo ottantesimo compleanno,
ed. Renato
Traini,vol. 1, Rome(1984),pp. 17>210. (offprint)
Chehata,Chafik,Therone
generalede lobligationendroitm2zsulman,
Cairo( 1936)(Also( 1969ediiion) Paris:Sirey.
Chehata,Chafik,"Le projectde nouveauCode Civil ", ffournaldes TnbunauxMixtes,series
beginning25/26February(No. 3579),ending22123December1948(No. 4015)(194648).
Chehata,Chafik,"Les Sllrvivancesmusulmanesdans la codificationde droitcivil egypiien"
RevueIntenzational
deDroitCompare17 (196S),pp. 839-853.
CongresIIlternational
de E)roitCompare,Voeuxet Resolutions,
The Hague)(1937).
David, Rene, LeDroitFrangais,2 vols., Paris:L.G.D.J. (1960).
David, Rene, FrenchLaw: Its Structure,Sourcesand Methodology,
trans. M Kindred.Baton
Rouge-LouisianaStateUniversityPress(1972).
Edge, Ian, "Comparative
Conercial Law of Egyptand the ArabianGulf', ClevelandState
LawReview34(1)(1985),pp. 129-144.
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
216
Gami'i, 'Abd al-Basit al-, "'Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanhuri:al-Rajil alladhi faqadnahu" (The Man
Whom We Forgot), MajallatalXada' (Baghdad)27 (3 & 4) (1972). (offprint)
Habachy, Saba, "Supreme Constitutional Court (Egypt): Shan'aand Riba", trans. of decision
in Case No. 20 of Judicial Year No. 1, ArabLawQuarterly
1(1) (1985), pp. 10>107.
Habachy, Saba, "Commentaryon the Decision of the SupremeCourl of Egypt Given on 4 May
1985 Concerning the Legitimacy of Interest and Constitutionalityof Article 26 of the New
Egyptian Civil Code of 1948",ArabLawQuarterly
1(2) (1986), pp. 239-241.
Harris, ChristillaPhelps, Nationalistn
andRevolulion
inEgypt:TheRoleof theMuslimBrethren,
The Hague: Mouton (1964).
Hauriou, Maurice, "Police juridique et fond du droit. A propos du livre d'al-Sanhoury: les
restrictions contractuelles a la liberte individuelle du travaildans la jurisprudenceanglaise",
RevueTnmeslnelle
deDroilCivil25 (1926),pp. 265-312.
Hill, Enid, Makkama!
Studiesin lheEgyptianLegalSyslem,London: Ithaca 1979(a).
Hill, Enid, "Change and Continuity in an Egyptian Legal Institution: the Niyaba,,"Law and
Contemporary
Social Changein Ept, CairoPapersin SocialScience2(4) (1979(b)), pp.
11S124.
Jwaideh, Zuhair, "The New Civil Code of Iraq", GeorgeWashington
LawReview22(2) (1953),
pp. 179186.
Khadduri, Majid, PoliticalTrendsin the Arab World,Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University
Press (1970).
Khadduri, Majid, TheIslamicConception
ofustice, Baltimore:Johns Hopkins University Press
(1984).
Khattab, Diya Shit, "'Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanhuri: 1895-1971", Majallalal-qada'(Baghdad)
16(3) (1971). (offprint)
Lambert, Edouard, "Conferencesde M. Le Prof. Ed. Lambert",Majallatal-qanunwal-iqtisad
7(3) (1937), pp. 169-184; 439453.
Maima' al-lugha al-'arabiyya,Majalla7 (1953), pp. 17-19; 111-1 15.
Majma'al-lugha al-'arabiyya,Id. 8, pp. 398406.
Marsot, Afaf Lutfi al-Sayyid, Evpt's LiberalExperiment:
1922-1936,Berkeley: University of
CaliforniaPress (1977).
MIDEO (Melanges de l'Institut Dorninicain d'Etudes Orientales)"Le departrnentculturel de
la ligue arabe", (1 Cairo) (1954), pp. 171-177, esp. p. 174.
MIDEO, "Nouvelles Culturelles" 4 (1957), pp. 321-326, esp. pp. 321, 323, 324.
Ministry of Justice (Egypt), alQanun al-madani:maima'atal-a'malal-tahdiriya
(The Civil
Code, Compendium of PreparatoryWork), 7 vols., Cairo(n.d., circa 1949).
Mursi,AhrnadFathi, "Ustadh al-asatidha"(The Professorof Professors),in al-'Idal-mia'wilikulliyatal-huquq,
(The CentenIiialAnniversaryof the Faculty of Law, Cairo(1980). (offprint)
Qulali(Kolaly), Muhammad Mustapha al-, "Kilma" (A Few Words), Majallatmajma'al-lugha
al-arabiya,(1972).
Onar,S.S., "The Majalla", Law in theMiddleEasl, eds. M Khadduriand H Liebesny, Washington: The Middle East Institute (1955).
Reid, Donald, LawyersandPoliticsin theArabWorld,Minneapolis/Chicago:Bibliotheca Islamica (1981).
Sanhuri(Sanhoury), 'Abd al-Razzaq al-, Lesrestrictions
contracluelles
a la liberleindividuelle
de
travaildanslajurisprudence
anglaise,Paiis:Marcel Biard (1925).
Sanhuri(Sanhoury), 'Abd al-Razzaqal-, Le Califat,Paris: LibrairieOrientalistePaul Geuthner
(1926).
Sanhuri(Sanhoury), 'Abd al-Razzaq al-, 'Aqdal-ijar(The Contractof Leasing) Beirut (n.d.),
Originallypublished in Cairo (1930).
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
BIBLIOGRAPHY
217
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-) "L'Universiteegyptienneau
congresinternationalde
droitcomparede la Haye",Majallatal-qanum
wal-iqtasad
2(5) (1932),pp. 289-312.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, NazarEyyat
al-' aqd(The Theoryof Contract),Cairo
(1934).
Sanhuri(Sanhoury)>
'Abdal-Razzaqal-, ;'Lestandardjuridique",Recueild'etudessurles
sources
dudroiten likonnear
deFranfoisGenynYO1. 2, Paris(1935),pp. 144 156.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-, "Majallatal-qada'fi 'ahdiha
al-jadid"(A New Erafor
the Journalof ie Judiciary),MajaZlat
al-qada}(Baghdad)2(2)(1936(a)),pp. 1-3.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, "MinMajallalal-akkam
al-'adlEya
illa al-Qenunalmadanial-iraqiwa harakatal-taqninal-madanifi 'usural-hadith"
(Fromthe Majallato the
CivilCodeof IraqandCivilCodificationin the ModernEra),
Majallatal-qada'2(2)(1936(b)),
pp. F65.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury)'Abdal-Razzaqal-, ;ial-Kitabal-marfu'illa
fakhamatraislainattahdiralqanunal-madanial-'iraqiwal-wathiqatan"
(Reportto the Headof the Commltteeof the Iraqi
CivilCodeand two Documents),Mayallatal-qada2(2)(1936(c)) pp
225ff.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-, "Wajubtanqihal-qanun
al-madanial-misriwa 'alaayy
asas yakun hathaal-tanqih"(The Task of Revisingthe Civil
Code of Egypt and on What
BasisIt ShouldBe Done),Majallutal-qanuntval-iqtasad
6(1)(1936(d)),pp. 1-142.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury))'Abdal-Razzaqal-, "Inauguration
of the SeventhYearof the Review"(in
Arabicand French),Majallatal-qanunwal-iqtisad
7(1)(1937),a; i-iv.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abd aI-Razzaqal-, "'Alaayy asasyakuntanqih
al-qanunal-madanialrrlisri"(On WhatBasisWillBe the Revisionof the EgyptianCivil
Code),al-Kitabal-dhahabi
Iil-mahakim
al-ahliyya,vol. 2, Cairo(1938(a)),pp. 10S143.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),?Abdal-Razzaqal-,"Le droit musulmancomme
elementde refontedu
code civil egypiien",Recueild'etudesen l'honnear
dyEdouard
Lamberlvol. 3, Paris L.G.D.J.
(1938(b)),pp. 621-642.
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-,al-Mujizfi
al-nazariyya
al-'amma
h qanun
al-madanial-misri(Outlineof the GeneralTheoryof Obligationsin the lil-iltizamat
EgyptianCivilCode),
Cairo(1938(c)).
Sanhuri(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal->with AhmadHishmatAbu
Sittit
Usal al-qanura
aw
madthulli-dirasatsl-qanun(PrincipIesof lawor an Introductionto
Law),Cairo(1941).
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, "Muhadarat
al-duktural-Sanhurialladhialqahabiljama iyya al-jughrafiyya
al-malakiyya'an mashru'tanqihal-qanunal-madani"(Lecturesto
the RoyalGeographicalSocietyon the Projectof the Revisionof
the Civil Code), al-Muhamah,22(4&6)(1942),pp. 419431.
Sarlhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, "La responsabilitecivile et penaleen
droit musulman', Majallatal-qanunwal-iqtisad155(1,2J3)(1945),pp. 1-26.
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'AbdaI-Razzaqal-, "al-Jadidwal-Qadim'7
(The New and the Old), special
issueof al-Hilal(January)(1949),pp. S8.
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, "Taqdim,'7(Forward)to the first issue
of Majallat
Mailisal-dawla1(1)(1950),pp. 1-32.
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-, "Ta'binfaqidmisral-'azim(Eulogyto a
GreatEgyptian):'Abdal-'AzizFahmiPasha',MajallatMailisal-dawls,2
(1951),a-n.
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abdal-Razzaqal-andOsmanKhalilOsman,4sLeConseil
d'Etategyptien
et le Conseild'EtatfranSais")Le Conseild'Etat:livreJubilaire.
Publiepourcommemorerson
centcinquantieme
anniversaire24 December1949,Paris:Sirey(1952),pp. 575-583.
Sanhuri
(Sanhoury),'Abd al-Razzaqal-, al-Wasitfisharhal-qanunal-madani
aldadid(Middle
Commentaryon the New CivilCode), 10 partsin 12vols., Cairo
(1952-1970).
,
,
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
218
ARAB LAW QUARTERLY
Sanhuri (Sanhoury), 'Abd al-Razzaq al-, Masadiral-ha4qfi al-fighal-islami(The Sources of
Legal Right in Islamic Jurisprudence),6 parts in 2 vols., Cairo (195F1959).
Sanhuri (Sanhoury), 'Abd al-Razzaq al-, "al-Qanun al-madani al-'arabi" (The Arab Civil
Code), al-Qada'(Baghdad) 20(2) (1962), pp. 7-33.
Shakra, Gamal, "al-Harakaal-siyasiyyafi niisr min thawratyulyu 1952 illa azmat maris 1954"
(The Political Activity in Egypt from the July 1952 Revolution to the Crisis of March 1954)
M A thesis, Ein Shsms University, Cairo (1985).
Weber, Max, LawinEconomy
andSociety,trans. and ed. Max Rheinstein, Cambridge:Harvard
University Press (1954).
Ziadeh, Farhat, Lawers, theRule of Law andLiberalism
in ModernEgypt,Stanford: Hoover
Institution (1968).
This content downloaded from 128.111.121.42 on Thu, 19 Sep 2013 09:50:31 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions