Case Explained:This article breaks down the legal background, charges, and implications of Case Explained: Taliban Say Opposing Their Laws Is a Crime – KabulNow – Legal Perspective
KABUL, AFGHANISTAN – The Taliban’s Ministry of Justice has declared that criticizing or opposing the group’s laws constitutes a crime under Islamic law, warning that dissenters will be prosecuted.
In a statement released on Wednesday, 28 January, the ministry responded to criticism of the Taliban’s recently endorsed Criminal Procedure Principles, asserting that any objection to the group’s legislation is religiously impermissible.
According to the statement, Taliban legislative documents are based on the Qur’an (Islam’s holy book), the Sunnah (the teachings and practices of the Prophet Muhammad), and authoritative Hanafi jurisprudential sources (a Sunni school of Islamic law), and do not contain any provisions that contradict Islamic law.
“There is no article, clause, or ruling in the legislative documents of the Islamic Emirate that is inconsistent with Sharia,” the statement said.
“Opposing these laws is equivalent to opposing Sharia.”
The ministry added that objections to Taliban laws lack a religious or scholarly basis and are instead rooted in ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation. It said such objections are considered a crime under Sharia and that individuals who challenge the laws will be referred to judicial and legal bodies for prosecution.
The statement follows the recent endorsement by the Taliban’s supreme leader of a document known as the Criminal Procedure Principles of the Courts, which outlines how criminal cases are handled under Taliban rule.
The Criminal Procedure Principles serve as the main judicial framework for Taliban courts, defining how criminal cases are investigated, tried, and punished. Unlike internationally recognized legal systems, the document is not based on a constitution or codified civil law and relies solely on the Taliban’s interpretation of Islamic jurisprudence. Critics say it grants broad discretionary powers to Taliban-appointed judges and lacks basic legal safeguards, including guarantees of fair trial, access to legal representation, and protection against arbitrary detention.
The endorsement and planned implementation of the document have triggered widespread criticism from political groups and human rights organizations, which have described its implications as alarming.
The Afghan human rights organization Rawadari said the principles recognize only followers of the Hanafi school of Sunni Islam, labeling followers of other Islamic schools as “innovators” (a term used to accuse others of religious deviation).
Rawadari also stated that the document legitimizes social classification and slavery and narrowly defines violence against women and children as severe physical harm, while failing to prohibit psychological and sexual violence.
The organization further warned that the principles classify Taliban opponents as “rebels” (baghi, a term in Islamic law referring to those deemed to have risen against a ruler), authorize their killing, and do not uphold basic standards of fair trial, increasing the risk of arbitrary arrests, repression, and abuse.