Islamic Law

Islamic Law

Legislating with Artificial Intelligence from the Perspective of Islamic Jurisprudence: Permissibility, Boundaries, and Sharīʿah Requirements

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
mahdi moradi berelian 1
Mohammad Ghsem Tangestani 2
1 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law and Political Science, University of Mazandaran, Babolsar, Iran
2 Associate Professor, International Law Dept., Faculty of Law and Political Science, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran.
10.22034/ilaw.2026.2065761.3655
Abstract
The rise of big data and deep learning models has opened new possibilities for the use of artificial intelligence in legislative processes. In the legal system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, however, the central question is not merely whether AI can be used in lawmaking, but in which capacity and within what limits such use may be compatible with the foundations of Imāmī jurisprudence. This article aims to clarify the permissibility, limits, and Sharīʿah-based requirements of employing AI in legislation. It proceeds from the premise that an intelligent system may not occupy the position of juristic inference, issue a religious ruling, or independently enact binding law. Rather, its legitimate role is confined to subject-matter identification, data collection and analysis, impact assessment, detection of inconsistencies, and assistance in drafting legislative proposals. Using an analytical-ijtihādī method and a descriptive-analytical approach, the article examines the functions of AI across three stages of legislation: pre-legislation, intra-legislation, and post-legislation. The findings show that AI may be permissible as an auxiliary expert tool, provided that data integrity, methodological transparency, explainability of outputs, human attribution of responsibility, and continuous juristic-legal oversight are ensured. The article also distinguishes between the maxim of lā ḍarar, the prohibition of causing harm, and the rules of liability and compensation. It argues that extending the concept of harm to algorithmic injuries, such as discrimination, privacy violations, or impairment of human dignity, is justified only where the harm is typical, attributable, assessable, and affects a legitimate right or interest. The proposed framework is therefore based on data governance, juristic-legal evaluation of algorithmic outputs, and final authorization by competent human and Sharīʿah-based authorities.
Keywords
Artificial Intelligence
Legislative Process
Imāmī Jurisprudence
Lā Ḍarar
Prohibition of Harm
Liability
Data Governance
Subjects
1.       آخوند خراسانی، محمدکاظم‌بن‌حسین؛ کفایةالأصول؛ ج۲، چ۴، تهران: امیرکبیر، ۱۳۵۸.
2.       ابن‌عاشور، محمدطاهر؛ مقاصدالشریعة الإسلامیة؛ قاهره: دار‌السلام، ۱۳۸۶.
3.       انصاری، مرتضی‌بن‌محمد امین؛ المکاسب؛ ج۱، قم: دارالکتب الإسلامیه، ۱۴۱۵ق.
4.       حلّی (علامه حلّی)، حسن‌بن‌یوسف‌بن‌مطهر؛ تحریرالأحکام الشرعیة علی مذهب‌الإمامیة؛ ج۱، قم: مؤسسة النشرالإسلامی، ۱۴۰۸ق.
5.       حلّی (علامه حلّی)، حسن‌بن‌یوسف‌بن‌مطهر؛ نهایةالاحکام فی معرفةالأحکام؛ ج2، قم: مؤسسه اسماعیلیان ، 1410 ق.
6.       حلّی (محقق حلّی)، عبداللّه؛ شرائع‌الإسلام فی مسائل الحلال والحرام؛ ج4، نجف: مطبعة المکتبةالعلمیه، 1413ق.
7.       حلّی، ابن‌ادریس؛ السرائرالحاوی لتحریرالفتاوی؛ ج2، قم: مؤسسة النشرالإسلامی التابعة لجماعةالمدرسین، ۱۴۱۰ق.
8.       خمینی، سیدروح‌اللّه؛ تحریر‌الوسیلة؛ ج۱، چ۲، قم: دفتر نشر فرهنگ اسلامی، ۱۳۸۲.
9.       خمینی، سیدروح‌اللّه؛ ولایت فقیه (حکومت اسلامی)؛ چ۱، قم: انتشارات انقلاب اسلامی، ۱۳۶۰.
10.  طبری، محمد‌بن‌جریر؛ تاریخ‌الرسل والملوک؛ ج۳، بیروت: دارالفکر، ۱۴۰۷ق.
11.  طوسی، ابوجعفر محمد‌بن‌حسن؛ النهایة فی مجردالفقه والفتاوی؛ بیروت: دارالکتاب العربی، 1400ق.
12.  عاملی (شهید اول)، محمد‌بن‌مکی؛ القواعد والفوائد؛ ج۲، قم: مؤسسة النشرالإسلامی، ۱۴۱۲ق.
13.  عاملی (شهید ثانی)، زین‌الدین‌بن‌علی؛ شرح لمعه؛ ج۱، قم: مؤسسة النشرالإسلامی، ۱۴۱۳ق.
14.  کلینی، محمد‌بن‌یعقوب؛ الکافی؛ ج۲، تهران: دارالکتب الإسلامیه، ۱۴۰۹ق.
15.  مفید، محمد‌بن‌محمد؛ المقنعة؛ قم: کنگره جهانى هزاره شیخ مفید، 1413ق.
16.  نائینی، میرزا محمدحسین؛ تنبیه‌الأمة و تنزیه‌الملة؛ ترجمه سیدجواد ورعی؛ قم: بوستان کتاب، 1403.
17.  نجفی، محمدحسن؛ جواهرالکلام فی شرح شرائع‌الإسلام؛ ج۱، قم: دار إحیاء التراث‌العربی، ۱۳۶۴.
18.    Bank Negara Malaysia; Discussion Paper on Artificial Intelligence in the Malaysian Financial Sector; Kuala Lumpur: Bank Negara Malaysia, 2025.
19.    European Parliament and Council; Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of 13 June 2024 Laying Down Harmonised Rules on Artificial Intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act); Official Journal of the European Union, 2024.
20.    Floridi, Luciano, and Josh Cowls; “A Unified Framework of Five Principles for AI in Society”; Harvard Data Science Review, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2019, pp. 1–13.
21.    Kitchin, Rob; The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Data Infrastructures and Their Consequences; London: SAGE, 2014.
22.    Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI); National Artificial Intelligence Roadmap 2021–2025 (AI-RMAP); Putrajaya: MOSTI, 2021.
23.    Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI); National Guidelines on AI Governance and Ethics; Putrajaya: MOSTI, 2024.
24.    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0); NIST AI 100-1, Gaithersburg: National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2023.
25.    OECD; Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence (OECD/LEGAL/0449); Paris: OECD, 2024.
26.    Rahwan, Iyad, et al.; “Machine Behaviour”; Nature, Vol. 568, 2019, pp. 477–486.
27.    Russell, Stuart, and Peter Norvig; Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach; 3rd ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2010.
28.    Selbst, Andrew D., and Solon Barocas; “The Intuitive Appeal of Explainable Machines”; Fordham Law Review, Vol. 87, 2018, pp. 1085–1139.
29.    Susskind, Richard; Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future; 3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023.
30.    UNESCO; Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence; Paris: UNESCO, 2021.