The Untold Truth and the Misconception of Incompatibility:

Defending Islamic Freedom of Expression against Secular Exclusivity for a Sustainable Theoretical Middle-Ground

Mahmoud Masud

 

Abstract: This article examines the theoretical foundation of freedom of expression in Western philosophy and Islamic law. It challenges the general, secular and Western assumption that Islamic law is incompatible with universal human rights, particularly freedom of expression and demonstrates that both systems recognise freedom of expression as a pillar of democracy, yet regulated within a distinct framework of competing interests. These interests include human dignity, public order and morality, collectively for the protection of vulnerable groups. Therefore, the primary contribution of this article is establishing a sustainable middle-ground for regulating free expression in pluralistic societies. The article adopts a comparative doctrinal and theoretical approach, first, to examine the traditional and contemporary Western free speech, particularly the discovery of truth, autonomy and self-fulfilment, participation in democracy and suspicion of government. Secondly, the article critically examines equivalent Qur’anic principles and prophetic practices, in addition to secondary Islamic sources, such as ijtihad (juristic reasoning), ijmaa (consensus) and qiyas (analogy), to further advance the compatibility of Islamic Law as an adequate human rights system. The findings demonstrate that the theoretical foundation of Islamic law does not unjustifiably restrict freedom of expression but rather embeds it within a moral and legal framework aimed at combating harm and injustice. Similarly, the theory of Western free speech acknowledges the legitimacy of restrictions, especially where an impugned expression threatens the rights and safety of others. Therefore, this article contends that the alleged incompatibility between Islamic law and Western free speech is largely a product of selective interpretations, exclusivity, and false conflation of the Islamic faith with arbitrary authoritarianism. This article concludes that, in fact, and contrary to these claims, a shared common ground exists between both ideologies, which is collectively sufficient to provide a universally acceptable framework for freedom of expression.