Restorative Justice in Islamic Jurisprudence and Western Legal Philosophy: A Comparative Analysis of Core Principles

العدالة التصالحية في الفقه الإسلامي والفلسفة القانونية الغربية: تحليل مقارن للمبادئ الأساسية

Abstract

This paper presents a comparative analysis of restorative justice in Islamic jurisprudence and Western legal philosophy. Both legal systems aim at the betterment of society, but the mechanisms and foundations for resolving disputes differ due to their historical and doctrinal origins. In Islam, restorative justice derives primarily from the Qur’an and Sunnah, emphasizing reconciliation, forgiveness, and community cohesion alongside legal redress. In contrast, Western legal systems evolved through historical practices and philosophical developments, emphasizing codified procedures, rehabilitation, and structured conflict resolution. This study examines key phases and practices that create differences between the two systems, including the role of religion, moral principles, forgiveness, and the concept of sulh (amicable settlement) in Islamic law. Despite these differences, both systems share fundamental objectives: maintaining social order, ensuring justice, and protecting the rights of individuals. The paper highlights the points of convergence and divergence, analyzing how cultural, ethical, and procedural variations influence the implementation and outcomes of restorative justice. By exploring these dimensions, the research underscores the potential for cross-cultural learning and integration of best practices, while also respecting the distinct philosophical and religious foundations of each system. Ultimately, the study provides a nuanced understanding of how restorative justice functions within diverse legal frameworks and emphasizes its universal relevance for promoting justice, reconciliation, and societal harmony.