Baharan Lahib

Afghanistan — A few days ago, the Taliban republished its judicial regulations, a document considered one of the most important instruments governing the judicial system in Afghanistan following the movement’s return to power. These regulations do not merely define judicial procedures; they also reflect the Taliban’s vision of justice, law, Sharia, and the place of the individual within the structure of power.

From the outset, the Taliban’s judicial regulations reveal their complete reliance on the “application of Islamic Sharia” as the sole source of legislation, with no reference whatsoever to previous civil laws, the Afghan constitution, or the country’s international obligations. This approach has led to the dismantling of the modern legal system and the disregard of legal achievements accumulated over past decades.

This charter is characterized by the near-total concentration of judicial authority in the hands of Taliban leaders, foremost among them Hibatullah Akhundzada. Judges are not selected based on professional competence or judicial independence, but rather on ideological loyalty and organizational obedience— a clear violation of the principle of judicial independence. The charter also fails to clearly define the rights of the accused: the right to legal counsel, the right to remain silent, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a fair trial are either entirely absent or presented in vague terms, opening the door to widespread violations and arbitrary rulings.

The issue of testimony within this system is also framed according to the Taliban’s rigid and traditional interpretation of jurisprudence. The value of testimony given by women, religious minorities, and individuals not affiliated with the Taliban is severely restricted or ignored altogether, reflecting structural discrimination embedded within the judicial system.

Taliban court rules do not clearly distinguish between criminal, political, and moral crimes. Many personal and social behaviors— especially those attributed to women— are defined and punished as “Islamic crimes” without clear or precise legal standards. The primary objective of this system is not rehabilitation or justice, but rather the instillation of social fear and the consolidation of Taliban authority. Taliban courts often operate behind closed doors without independent oversight, and in many cases judicial rulings are final and not subject to appeal. Under these rules, the Taliban present themselves as the supreme authority for interpreting Islamic Sharia, while all Taliban judges simultaneously assume security or intelligence roles, facilitating systematic repression and entrenched injustice.

In dealing with political opponents and critics of Taliban rule, harsh sentences are issued through expedited trials, revealing the repressive nature of the judiciary. Ethnic and religious minorities are not afforded equal protection under this judicial system, as their rights are not recognized by law— deepening social divisions and eroding public trust. Overall, the Taliban court system focuses on preserving the group’s authoritarian rule rather than ensuring justice. Justice, in this context, is not defined as a human principle but as a function serving the Taliban’s political and ideological interests.

Rulings Related to Women

Within the Taliban court regulations, women are not defined as citizens with independent rights, but rather as “subjects of Sharia rule.” This concept forms the basis of all rulings and regulations that directly or indirectly affect women’s lives. Women have been completely excluded from the judicial structure; there is no provision allowing women to serve as judges, prosecutors, or judicial staff. This exclusion has rendered the judiciary entirely male-dominated and ideological.

Women’s participation in judicial proceedings is also subject to severe restrictions. In many cases, women are not permitted to appear before court without a “male guardian (mahram),” a condition that gravely undermines women’s right to access justice.

Under this legal framework, women’s testimony is not accorded the same value as men’s. In many cases, women’s testimony is either rejected outright or requires male corroboration, reflecting institutionalized gender-based discrimination. Women are prosecuted more frequently than men for so-called “moral crimes” or “chastity offenses.” The vague definition of these crimes allows for widespread abuse, coercion, and repression of women. A woman’s behavior, clothing, mobility, and social relationships can be deemed religious violations, while identical conduct by men is not criminalized.

In cases of adultery or extramarital relationships, the Taliban routinely place the burden of blame on women without evidence, resulting in harsher punishments for women than ever before. Taliban court rules also fail to clearly distinguish between consent, coercion, and sexual violence, thereby denying rape survivors legal protection.

In family disputes— including divorce, child custody, and alimony— Taliban interpretations systematically favor men. Women are not recognized as having the right to make independent decisions, and male guardianship dominates their lives. Domestic violence against women is not defined as a separate crime, increasing impunity for perpetrators and perpetuating abuse within families. During the enforcement of rulings, women are more vulnerable to public and humiliating punishments that target not only their bodies but also their dignity and psychological security.

Overall, the provisions related to women in the Taliban court system demonstrate that women are not viewed as rights-bearing individuals, but rather as a source of “moral danger” that must be contained and controlled.

As a result of the implementation of this judicial system, fear has replaced trust in justice. Many citizens— particularly women— resort to silence or forced concessions instead of seeking recourse through the courts. The Taliban judicial system not only fails to deliver justice, but has become an instrument for entrenching political and ideological domination. Rather than resolving disputes, this judiciary has itself become a new source of violence and injustice.

As long as this judicial system remains the foundation of governance, hope for an independent, comprehensive, and humane justice system in Afghanistan will remain out of reach. Escape from this suffering will only be possible through the continued struggle of conscious women and men