Mare Nostrum: The Revival of the Maritime Boundary Conflict in the Eastern Region of the Mediterranean Sea

Presentation (2020, March 17)

The 2004 Afghan Constitution and Islam Merits and Challenges

Scientific Conference (2019, November 11)

A Tale of Two Theories: Government by Judiciary Theory Versus Guardianship of the Jurist Theory

in Emory International Law Review (2019), 33

This research argues that Muslim scholars developed two theories of government over time. Even tough Islamic scholars—Shia and Sunni—agree on mandating the highest level of legal knowledge in any member ... [more ▼]

This research argues that Muslim scholars developed two theories of government over time. Even tough Islamic scholars—Shia and Sunni—agree on mandating the highest level of legal knowledge in any member of the Islamic government, they disagree on the legal nature of these members, whether they are judges, or jurists. Shia Islamic scholars adopted the theory of the guardianship of the jurist (Wilayat al-Faqih in Arabic, or Vilayat e-Faqih in Farsi). Unlike Sunni scholars, the Shia has developed a practical approach to apply their theory of government in practice. A prominent example of this theory is the Iranian practice of the Guardianship of the Jurist Theory. Sunni Islamic scholars adopt the theory of government by judiciary (Wilayat Al-Qadi). The assumption of this theory is that member of the government are judges. This is based on the assumption that Prophet Mohamed was a judge with enumerated executive authorities, namely the collection of Sadaqat (state financial revenue), military power, and foreign affairs’ representation. This theory has never been in practice since the assassination of the first four successors of the Prophet. This research is divided into three major sections. The first deals with the theory of Sunni-Muslim scholars, which is government by judiciary. The second section presents the theory of Shia-Muslim scholars, which is guardianship of the jurist. The last section deals with the major five distinctions between the two theories. [less ▲]

GOVERNMENT BY JUDICIARY IN ISLAM: ISLAMIC THEORY OF GOVERNMENT AND MAL/PRACTICE OF MUSLIM GOVERNMENTS (TURKEY, SAUDI ARABIA, EGYPT AND MOROCCO)

in California Western International Law Journal (2018), 2

The Dilemma of Judicial Appointment in Egypt Questions of Gender Equality, Elimination of Political Opposition and Underprivileged Citizens

in DePaul Journal for Social Justice (2018)

NATO, the EU and the Arab refugee Crisis

in Penn State Journal of Law and International Affairs (2018)

Modern Application of the Islamic Principle of Brotherhood: An Assessment of the Syrian Refugees' Relocation Solution in Egypt

in San Diego International Law Journal (2018)

This Article argues that the Islamic principle of Brotherhood provides a feasible basis to solve the Arab refugee crisis. The Islamic solution is based on relocating Syrian refugees to Egypt. The solution ... [more ▼]

This Article argues that the Islamic principle of Brotherhood provides a feasible basis to solve the Arab refugee crisis. The Islamic solution is based on relocating Syrian refugees to Egypt. The solution has many positive factors that make it the most promising solution among the various other proposed solutions. The Syrian refugee crisis has been one of the major challenges for many Western countries, who have found themselves between a rock and a hard place, faced with two options. The first option involves agreeing to host the massive waves of refugees, to honor their principles of human dignity and morality. The second involves closing their doors to all refugees, in order to protect their people. Many countries made their own choice: some chose the first option, while many others are still struggling to find a way to accommodate the second choice. Politicians, philosophers and business executives proposed several solutions, most of which are of proven inefficacy, like those of Trump and the EU. A third proposed solution sought to relocate Syrian refugees in a third Arab/Muslim country, which is the least analyzed solution. This research assesses this third solution from six perspectives: historical, moral, cultural, legal, economic, and political. The Article is divided into three main parts. The first presents the Islamic base, and logic for the relocation project. The second tackles the assessment of the solution, while the third proposes some recommendations regarding several practical aspects, like formulating the negotiation and project teams, as well as the assessment and progress of the project. [less ▲]

Judicial Appointment in Comparative Context: Judicial Appointment Power versus Judicial Appointment Qualifications,

Presentation (2017, November)

Call for Judicial Reform

Presentation (2017, April)

The Egyptian Judiciary in The age of The republic The Role of Internal Conflicts in ConTrolling The Judicial system

in Indonesian Journal of International and Comparative Law (2017)

The Egyptian judiciary has struggled against the executive authority for the past decades. This struggle has seen many losses and gains. It has paved the road for the judiciary to play a role in the ... [more ▼]

The Egyptian judiciary has struggled against the executive authority for the past decades. This struggle has seen many losses and gains. It has paved the road for the judiciary to play a role in the constitutional process in the last five years. Many scholars present this judicial struggle as a conflict between the executive and the judiciary. However, the history of the internal conflicts among judges remains a mystery or is merely implied. Such conflicts have taken on various forms based on the political regime in power. As a result, this research argues that the struggle was not only between political regimes and the judiciary, but also expressed itself in an internal conflict among the members of the judiciary. This research is limited to the Republic period, lasting from 1952 to 2014. This period can be divided into seven different eras. This research, however, separates the history of the Republic into just six main eras, due to excluding the al-Sisi era (2014-18), given that he was still in power during the writing of this research. It is historically unfair to document incomplete periods, despite this constituting one of the worst periods in judicial history. Accordingly, this paper limits itself to presenting the internal conflicts witnessed during only six eras. These eras involve the transition period after the monarchy, also known as the Mohamed Naguib era (1952-54), the Nasser era (1954-70), the al-Sadat era (1970-80), the Mubarak era (1980-2011), the SCAF era (2011-12), the Mohamed Morsi era (2012-13), and the transition period following the military coup, also known as the Mansur era (2013-14). [less ▲]