Report on the Engagement Between CEDAW and Islamic Thought

By Maddison Encarnação, New Age Islam 13 October 2025 1. Introduction The ongoing global discussion between international human rights law and the world’s diverse religious and ethical traditions is a crucial frontier in the universal pursuit of human dignity. In this complex interaction, gender equality occupies a particularly prominent and often contentious space, as it deeply involves ideas of identity, family, and societal structure. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1979, remains a foundational pillar of the international legal framework dedicated to this cause (United Nations [UN], 1979). As a comprehensive treaty, CEDAW requires state parties to pursue, by all suitable means, the elimination of discrimination against women in all areas of life, including political, economic, social, cultural, and civil domains (UN, 1979). The reception and implementation of CEDAW within nation-states where legal systems and societal norms are influenced by Islamic traditions has been a subject of debate and negotiation (Ali, 2006). This report posits that the interaction between CEDAW and Islamic thought is characterised by a fundamental resonance at the level of overarching ethical objectives, yet is marked by significant, though not insurmountable, tensions arising from specific legal injunctions and their interpretations. To navigate these complexities, this report will outline the key provisions and aims of CEDAW, examine the Islamic ethical and legal foundations relevant to gender justice, and conduct a detailed analysis of the main points of engagement and tension, focusing on CEDAW’s Articles 5 and 16. This report demonstrates how different theological, legal, and political orientations within the Muslim world influence the ongoing and evolving dialogue with CEDAW’s international legal obligations. 2. The Legal and Philosophical Framework of CEDAW CEDAW serves as the foundation of the international legal framework dedicated to promoting gender equality. It addresses both intentional discrimination (de jure) and laws, policies, and practices that are superficially neutral but have a disproportionately negative effect on women (de facto), thereby addressing indirect and systemic discrimination (Cusack & Pusey, 2013; Resnik, 2012). CEDAW’s goal to eliminate discrimination in “any other field” (UN, 1979, art. 1) enables it to transcend the traditional public/private dichotomy, allowing scrutiny of discrimination within the family and other private areas where violations of women’s rights are often pervasive (Cusack & Pusey, 2013, p. 9). While its thirty articles provide a comprehensive agenda for national action, Articles 5 and 16 are intended to be particularly transformative, targeting the private sphere and core social norms where discrimination is most deeply entrenched. Article 5 is the core of CEDAW, requiring states to dismantle the cultural and social patterns that sustain gender discrimination (Gilleri, 2022; Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022). It extends the nation-state's obligation beyond formal legal reforms to address the root causes of inequality, such as patriarchal ideologies and cognitive structures that perpetuate and justify women’s subordination (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022, p. 222). The provision mandates that states eliminate prejudices rooted in the idea of the “inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes” (UN, 1979, art. 5(a)), which acknowledges that harmful stereotypes and preconceptions of inferiority or superiority can be associated with both masculinity and femininity (Gilleri, 2022). In practice, Article 5 serves as both a substantive right and a versatile interpretive tool, applied across various gender-based issues to encourage states to engage in ongoing and proactive cultural change (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022, pp. 237-247). Equally important is Article 16, which guarantees equality “in all matters relating to marriage and family relations” (UN, 1979, art. 16(1)). It requires equal rights for men and women regarding entry into marriage, freely choosing a spouse, rights and responsibilities during marriage and at its dissolution, and equal rights and responsibilities as parents (Halperin-Kaddari & Freeman, 2022). This article seeks to dismantle the legal structures of patriarchy within the family, an institution traditionally governed by religious and customary laws in many societies (Shivdas & Coleman, 2010). Essentially, the CEDAW Committee stresses that Article 16 is central to the treaty’s aims, a ‘core provision’ without which women’s de jure and de facto equality cannot be realised (Carlestam, 2022; Halperin-Kaddari & Freeman, 2022). 3. Islamic Ethical and Legal Foundations The core ethical principles of Islam — justice, inherent human dignity, compassion, and the pursuit of public welfare — offer a framework for upholding the rights and dignity of all individuals, including women (Bhat & Nabi, 2024; Kamali, 2008). These values are rooted in the Qur’anic declaration that God has “honoured the children of Adam” (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 17:70) and the Prophetic mission to “[relieve] them of their burdens, and the iron collars that were on them” (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 7:157). This highlights an ethical obligation towards justice, equality, and freedom central to the Islamic worldview (Kamali, 2008, p. 4). Contemporary global Muslim movements, such as Musawah, explicitly base their advocacy for gender equality and family reform on these principles, asserting that justice and equality are not external impositions but intrinsic to the Islamic tradition (Dworska, 2024; Mahallati, 2010). These ethical ideals originate from the fundamental sources of Islamic normativity: the Qur’an, regarded as the direct revelation of God, and the Sunnah, which records the practices and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (Bhat & Nabi, 2024). Together, they comprise the Sharī‘ah, understood as a comprehensive moral and legal guide for life (Pietropaoli, 2019, pp. 5–7). However, a significant tension exists between these overarching ethical objectives and the specific Islamic laws (Fiqh) developed by classical jurists, particularly concerning gender roles (Hefner, 2011). As detailed in early traditions, classical jurisprudence often established a model of complementary yet distinct roles for men and women, resulting in various legal distinctions (Ali, 2006; Duderija et al., 2020). It is within Fiqh that conflicts with CEDAW’s provisions, particularly those requiring equal treatment in family law (Article 16) and the modification of discriminatory socio-cultural patterns (Article 5), become most noticeable (Elmir, 2021; Hefner, 2011). The reservations made by many Muslim-majority states to these articles, often justified by an asserted conflict with Sharī‘ah law, highlight this tension (Pietropaoli, 2019, pp. 4–5). These reservations are often vague, citing Sharī‘ah as a monolithic entity without specifying the particular juristic opinion or school being followed, thus protecting domestic laws from international scrutiny and internal reform (Pietropaoli, 2019, p. 4). Additionally, these reservations are often driven more by political motives and a desire to maintain a patriarchal status quo than by strict religious rules, as shown by the contrast with these same states’ general acceptance of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (Pietropaoli 2019, p. 8). 4. Article 5 4.1. Commonalities and Differences Article 5 of CEDAW holds a progressive position within international human rights law (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022). It requires states to modify social and cultural practices that perpetuate the idea of one gender's superiority over the other and to dismantle stereotyped gender roles (UN, 1979, art. 5(a)). Unlike provisions that prohibit discrimination in specific sectors, Article 5 addresses the structural and cultural foundations of inequality, positioning itself as a transformative norm (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022). Its breadth has led scholars to interpret it flexibly, viewing it not only as a safeguard for women but as a principle with the potential to challenge all gendered stereotypes that hinder human development (Gilleri, 2024). CEDAW acknowledged that deeply ingrained stereotypes and cultural norms are fundamental to exclusion, oppression, and violence against women (UN, 1979, art. 5). Consequently, Article 5 was therefore intended to go beyond legal reforms to call for changes in culture, education, media, and family structures (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022). The Qur’an itself presents an egalitarian view at the metaphysical and spiritual levels, affirming that men and women originate from a single soul (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 4:1; 49:13) and promising equal spiritual rewards and moral agency to both genders without distinction (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 33:35). These core principles, coupled with the Prophetic injunction from the Sunnah that the “seeking of knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim” (Ibn Majah, n.d., 1:224), directly challenge patriarchal stereotypes that limit women to a status of intellectual or moral inferiority. Similarly, the Qur’anic metaphor of spouses as “garments” (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 2:187) symbolises ideals of intimacy, reciprocity, mutual comfort, and protection. These values resonate closely with Article 5’s goal of transforming family gender relations into genuine partnerships based on equality and respect. 4.2. Scholarly Perspectives Yet, interpretive divergences emerge from the classical exegesis of Qur’an 4:34, a verse that has served as the primary scriptural foundation for a hierarchical gender structure within the family (Hussain, 2021). The verse has been interpreted by some to say: Men are Qawwamun of women through God having favoured one over the other and through their spending from their wealth. (Hussain, 2021, p. 67) The classical interpretation, embedded within “semi-contextualised and atomist understandings” (Duderija et al., 2020, p. 71), regarded Qiwamah as a comprehensive and inherent male authority over women. This perspective was supported by a “gender oppositionality theory” (Duderija, 2017, p. 149) common in the premodern tradition, which constructed masculinity around notions of ontological superiority, reasoned discourse, and authority, while femininity was associated with deficiency in reason and an aggressive sexuality that required male oversight. Consequently, Qiwamah was also interpreted as a legal right of the husband, granting him the role of guardian and head of the household, which in turn justified wifely obedience and guided laws regarding marriage, divorce, and marital discipline (Ali, 2010; Al-Sharmani, 2018). However, contemporary reformist and feminist scholars, employing the alternative hermeneutical methods outlined in the provided document, have deconstructed this patriarchal interpretation (Hussain, 2021). They maintain that the classical interpretation reflects the bias of its male exegeses more than the unchanging intention of the scripture (Dunn & Kellison, 2020; Wadud, 1999). Through a comprehensive contextualisation, they situate the verse within the socio-economic realities of 7th-century Arabia, where men were typically the sole financial providers (Dunn & Kellison, 2020). From this perspective, Qiwamah is not an ontological mandate of male superiority but a practical and temporary duty related to the economic support of the wife (Aisyah & Hidayah, 2023). This perspective is reinforced by a thematic-holistic approach that interprets Q4:34 alongside the Qur’an’s broader themes of justice, equality, and spiritual parity, as well as verses portraying marital relations as based on mutual love, mercy, and consultation (examples include verses 30:21, 2:233, 42:38 (Abdel Haleem, 2004)) (Ibrahim & Abdalla, 2010). 4.3. State Applications: Tunisia and Iran The practical engagement of Muslim-majority states demonstrates the diverse political uses of Article 5. Tunisia is one of the most progressive examples (Khedher, 2017). Since its 1956 Personal Status Code, reforms such as banning polygyny and granting women the right to divorce have been portrayed not as Western impositions but as ijtihād-based reinterpretations of Islamic law consistent with modernity (Khedher, 2017). By ratifying CEDAW in 1985 and subsequently removing all reservations in 2014, Tunisia utilised Article 5 to support a model of gender equality that it had consciously embedded in its constitutional framework (Timmer & Holtmaat, 2022). Iran, by contrast, has never ratified CEDAW despite significant internal debate. In 2003, Iran’s reformist parliament voted in favour of ratification, but the bill was rejected because its provisions conflicted with Sharīʿa, particularly concerning family law and gender equality (Kelly & Etling, 2008). Post-revolutionary reforms further entrenched patriarchal norms: the Family Protection Law was suspended in 1979 and replaced by Sharīʿa-based provisions that reinstated men’s unilateral right to divorce and limited women’s custody rights (Baktiari, 2011). Iranian women’s movements, such as One Million Signatures, have explicitly linked their struggle to CEDAW’s principles, challenging clerical authority (Mir-Hosseini, 2021). This contrast illustrates what Gilleri (2024) describes as the strategic deployment of Article 5: Tunisia has embraced it to harmonise Islamic reasoning with international human rights, whereas Iran has resisted it. 5. Article 16 5.1. Commonalities and Differences Article 16 of CEDAW requires signatory nation-states to eliminate discrimination in all matters relating to marriage and family life, envisioning the family as a legal and social sphere of parity (Campbell, 2018; Halperin-Kaddari & Freeman, 2022). Fundamentally, there are significant areas of convergence between CEDAW’s vision of marital equality and Islamic ethics (Jaffal et al., 2022). The Qur’an describes the spousal bond as one based on “love and kindness” (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 30:21), a phrase that aligns with CEDAW’s ideal of partnership. Classical Islamic law also recognises women’s rights to free marital consent, financial independence, and contractual entitlements (Nasir, 2009; Welchman, 2004). For example, the dower (mahr) is an enforceable right of the wife, not the husband, and women have historically maintained separate ownership of property, in stark contrast to contemporary patriarchal systems, where marriage often diminishes female legal status (Jaffal et al., 2022; Nasir, 2009). Additionally, mechanisms such as khulʿ (judicial divorce at the wife’s request) and ʿiddah (a waiting period designed to safeguard welfare interests) reflect concerns with balancing rights and responsibilities within marriage (Hussain & Akhtar, 2024). These illustrate that Islam and CEDAW share core commitments to consent, mutual support, and fairness in marital relations. Nevertheless, divergences remain. Polygyny is the clearest source of conflict: the Qur’an permits a man up to four wives under conditions of equity (Abdel Haleem, 2004, 4:3), but CEDAW’s insistence on substantive equality is fundamentally incompatible with such an imbalance (Jaffal et al., 2022). Likewise, male-only divorce rights starkly contrast with the more conditional options women have through khulʿ or faskh, which often depend on financial sacrifice or judicial discretion (Carlestam, 2022). Guardianship over children also highlights structural inequality: following divorce, fathers traditionally retain decision-making authority, while mothers are limited to temporary custodianship — a system that contravenes Article 16, which calls for “The same rights and responsibilities with regard to guardianship” (UN, 1979, art. 16(1)(f)) and parental authority (Duderija et al., 2020; Raday, 2019). 5.2. Scholarly Perspectives These tensions are reflected in the differing scholarly perspectives, which illustrate varying opinions. Traditionalist jurists and some state-appointed religious scholars (‘ulama) frame these differences as “complementary” rather than discriminatory, emphasising divinely ordained roles in family law (Jaffal et al., 2022). By contrast, reformist Muslim scholars and Islamic feminists, such as Amina Wadud and Ziba Mir-Hosseini, challenge these interpretations and call for contextual reinterpretation of texts (Duderija, 2014). They point to verses emphasising mutuality (“garments for each other,” Abdel Haleem, 2004, 2:187) and re-examine contentious terms, such as daraba in Qur’an 4:34 (Abdel Haleem, 2004), which they interpret symbolically rather than as permission for violence (Wadud, 1999; Mir-Hosseini et al., 2013). For these scholars, Islam’s maqāṣid al-Sharīʿah (higher objectives of law) align with CEDAW’s aims: both prioritise justice, dignity, and welfare, and legal reforms can be justified through renewed ijtihād (independent reasoning) (Abou-Bakr, 2013). 5.3. State Applications: Morocco and Saudi Arabia The application of family law across Muslim-majority states reveals a complex negotiation between CEDAW’s standards and diverse interpretations of Islamic law (Powell, 2019; Welchman, 2012). Morocco exemplifies state-led reform aimed at harmonising Islamic law with international standards (Laadam & Hasnaoui, 2025). Following significant internal lobbying and external pressure, Morocco revised its Family Code in 2004 to reduce conflicts with Article 16 (VanderMeulen, 2024). The reforms introduced joint spousal responsibility, greatly increased women’s access to divorce, imposed strict restrictions on the practice of polygyny, and equalised child custody provisions (Carlestam, 2022). This legislative reform, rooted in a reformist interpretation of Fiqh focused on justice and welfare, enabled Morocco to withdraw its reservation to Article 16 in 2011 (Ozdemir, 2025). In stark contrast, Saudi Arabia’s approach is decentralised and guided by scholars (Vogel, 2011). With Sharī‘a as the uncodified “law of the land” (Vogel, 2011, p. 57), ‘Ulama maintain traditional interpretations of guardianship and divorce, creating significant barriers to CEDAW’s egalitarian principles. Yet, changes emerge from civil society, through new marriage contracts, such as Misyar, which adjust Fiqh “without any need for action by the state” (Vogel, 2011, p. 85), representing a unique bottom-up process of legal evolution. The regional trends vary; they point to a gradual, contested movement towards aligning family laws with international standards. 6. Conclusion The engagement between CEDAW and Islamic thought reveals a landscape characterised by complex, layered negotiations over meaning, authority, and identity. Both frameworks affirm human dignity, justice, and the equal worth of all individuals. The Qur’an’s emphasis on shared origin, spiritual parity, and mutuality in marriage resonates deeply with CEDAW’s vision of substantive equality. Similarly, CEDAW’s transformative agenda in Articles 5 and 16 aligns with Islamic aims of justice, compassion, and public welfare. The encounter between CEDAW and Islamic thought should be seen as an evolving dialogue shaped by ethical commitments, interpretive traditions, and shifting political realities. The broader lesson is that advancing gender equality in Muslim-majority contexts depends less on the universality of human rights competing with religious particularity, and more on the willingness to engage in interpretive renewal, institutional reform, and cross-cultural dialogue. ----- References Abou-Bakr, O. (2013). Introduction: Why do we need an Islamic Feminism? [Ebook]. In Feminist and Islamic Perspectives: New Horizons of Knowledge and Reform (pp. 4–8). The Women and Memory Forum. https://www.wmf.org.eg/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/Final-English-Islamic.pdf Aisyah, S., & Hidayah, A. (2023). The Concept of Qiwamah and Its Implications for Gender Justice in Islamic Family Law in Indonesia. Journal of Gender Studies, 16(2), 251–268. Ali, S. S. (2006). Conceptualising Islamic law, CEDAW, and women’s human rights in plural legal settings: A Comparative Analysis of Application of CEDAW in Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan. Kumarian Press. Al-Sharmani, M. (2018). Marriage in Islamic Interpretive Tradition: Revisiting the legal and the ethical. Journal of Islamic Ethics, 2(1–2), 76–96. https://doi.org/10.1163/24685542-12340017 Baktiari, B. (2011). Iran: Shariʻa Politics and the Transformation of Islamic Law [Ebook]. In R. W. Hefner (Ed.), Shari’a Politics: Islamic Law and Society in the Modern World (pp. 121–145). Indiana University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/griffith/detail.action?docID=713664. Bhat, S., & Nabi, N. (2024). Islamic Ethics: Exploring its Principles and Scope. International Journal of Applied Ethics, 10, 69–85. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387398733_Islamic_Ethics_Exploring_its_Principles_and_Scope Campbell, M. (2018). Women, poverty, equality: The Role of CEDAW. Bloomsbury Publishing. Carlestam, C. (2022). Discrimination Against Women in Family Relations [Bachelor Thesis, Örebro University]. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1687804/FULLTEXT01.pdf Cusack, S., & Pusey, L. (2013). CEDAW AND THE RIGHTS TO NON-DISCRIMINATION AND EQUALITY. Melbourne Journal of International Law, 14. https://law.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/1687440/03Cusack1.pdf Duderija, A. (2014). Islam and Gender in the Thought of a Critical-Progressive Muslim Scholar Activist Ziba Mir Hosseini. Journal of Islam and Christian Muslim Relations, 25(4), 433–449. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2430628 Duderija, A. (2017). The gender-justice imperative [Ebook]. In The Imperatives of Progressive Islam (pp. 148–168). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315438849 Duderija, A., Alak, A. I., & Hissong, K. (2020). Islam and Gender: Major Issues and Debates [Ebook]. Routledge. Dunn, S., & Kellison, R. B. (2020). At the Intersection of Scripture and Law: Qur’an 4:34 and Violence against Women. Journal of Feminist Studies in Religion, 26(2), 11–36. https://doi.org/10.2979/fsr.2010.26.2.11 Dworska, Ż. (2024). Musawah movement’s activism for women’s rights as strengthening the trend of Islamic feminism. Chrześcijaństwo Świat Polityka, 28, 278–291. https://doi.org/10.21697/csp.2024.28.1.16 Elmir, M. (2021). Islam and Gender: Major Issues and Debates. Australian Journal of Islamic Studies, 6(2), 66–72. Gilleri, G. (2022). WOMEN, AND ALL OF US: ARTICLE 5(A) CEDAW AS A PROTECTION FOR ALL GENDERED INDIVIDUALS. European Journal of Legal Studies, 15(2), 137–171. https://doi.org/10.2924/EJLS.2024.009 Halperin-Kaddari, R., & Freeman, M. A. (2022). Article 16 [Ebook]. In P. Schulz, R. Halperin-Kaddari, B. Rudolf, & M. A. Freeman (Eds.), The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and its Optional Protocol: A Commentary (2nd ed., pp. 577–626). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780192862815.001.0001 Hefner, R. W. (2011). Introduction [Ebook]. In Shari’a Politics: Islamic Law and Society in the Modern World (pp. 1–54). Indiana University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/griffith/detail.action?docID=713664. Hussain, M., & Akhtar, J. (2024). Recent debates on wife’s right to judicial separation: an analysis of the traditional and modern interpretations of Muslim family laws in Pakistan. Contemporary Islam. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11562-024-00568-7 Hussain, S. (2021). The Bitter Lot of the Rebellious Wife: Hierarchy, Obedience, and Punishment in Q. 4:34. Journal of Qur’anic Studies, 23(2), 66–111. https://doi.org/10.3366/jqs.2021.0466 Ibrahim, N., & Abdalla, M. (2010). A critical examination of Qur’an 4:34 and its relevance to intimate partner violence in Muslim families. Journal of Muslim Mental Health, 5(3), 327–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/15564908.2010.551278 Jaffal, Z., Shawabkeh, F., & Obeidi, A. H. A. (2022). Toward constructive harmonisation of Islamic family law and CEDAW: a study on the UAE’s reservation to CEDAW Article 16 and equal rights to marriage and family relations. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 28(1), 139–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/1323238x.2022.2122689 Kamali, M. H. (2008). Shari’ah Law : An Introduction [Ebook]. Oneworld Publication. https://research-ebsco-com.libraryproxy.griffith.edu.au/c/vym2yo/ebook-viewer/epub/7rf772zqdj?route=details Kelly, J., & Etling, B. (2008). Mapping Iranʼs Online Public: Politics and Culture in the Persian Blogosphere (No. 2008–01). Berkman Center Research. https://cyber.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.harvard.edu/files/Kelly&Etling_Mapping_Irans_Online_Public_2008.pdf Khedher, R. (2017). Tracing the Development of the Tunisian 1956 Code of Personal Status. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 18(4), 30–37. https://vc.bridgew.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1961&context=jiws Laadam, J. A., & Hasnaoui, Y. (2025). The Role and Impact of Islamic Jurisprudence in the Legal Framework of Morocco. Journal of Islamic Studies and Culture, 13, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.15640/jisc.v13p1 Mahallati, A. (2010). Women in traditional Sharīʾa: a list of differences between men and women in Islamic tradition. Journal of Islamic Law and Culture, 12(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/1528817x.2010.528590 Mir-Hosseini, Z. (2021). Islam and gender: The Religious Debate in Contemporary Iran. Princeton University Press. Mir-Hosseini, Z., Vogt, K., Larsen, L., & Moe, C. (2013). Introduction: Muslim Family Law and the Question of Equality [Ebook]. In Gender and Equality in Muslim Family Law (pp. 1–36). I.B.Tauris & Co. http://ndl.ethernet.edu.et/bitstream/123456789/48329/1/39.pdf Nasir, J. J. (2009). The Status of Women under Islamic Law and Modern Islamic Legislation: Third Edition of the Revised and Updated Work. BRILL. Ozdemir, S. Z. (2025). Islamic Family Law in Morocco: historical developments and reforms. Ilahiyat Studies, 16(1), 107–122. https://doi.org/10.12730/is.1585555 Pietropaoli, I. (2019). Islamic Reservations to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The Journal of Human Rights, 14(28), 83–108. https://doi.org/10.22096/hr.2020.121455.1198 Powell, E. J. (2019). Islamic Law and International Law: Peaceful Resolution of Disputes [Ebook]. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190064631.001.0001 Raday, F. (2019). Gender Equality and Women’s Rights in the Context of Child Custody and Maintenance: An International and Comparative Analysis. UN Women. https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2019/Gender-equality-and-womens-rights-in-the-context-of-child-custody-and-child-maintenance-en.pdf Resnik, J. (2012). Comparative (in)equalities: CEDAW, the jurisdiction of gender, and the heterogeneity of transnational law production. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 10(2), 531–550. https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/mor064 Shivdas, M., & Coleman, S. (2010). Without prejudice: CEDAW and the Determination of Women’s Rights in a Legal and Cultural Context. Commonwealth Secretariat. The Book of the Sunnah (S. Ibn Majah, Trans.). (n.d.). 1. https://sunnah.com/ibnmajah The Qur’an (A. Haleem, Trans.). (2004). Oxford University Press. https://ia600501.us.archive.org/16/items/OxfordQuranTranslation/Oxford-Quran-Translation.pdf Timmer, A., & Holtmaat, R. (2022). Article 5 [Ebook]. In P. Schulz, R. Halperin-Kaddari, B. Rudolf, & M. A. Freeman (Eds.), The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women and its Optional Protocol: A Commentary (2nd ed., pp. 221–256). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780192862815.001.0001 United Nations [UN]. (1979, December 18). Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-elimination-all-forms-discrimination-against-women VanderMeulen, I. (2024). The opposition effect: Islamism and women’s rights in the midst of Morocco’s family code reform. In Middle East Briefs (No. 159). Brandeis University. https://www.brandeis.edu/crown/publications/middle-east-briefs/meb159.html Vogel, F. E. (2011). Saudi Arabia: Public, Civil, and Individual Shariʻa in Law and Politics [Ebook]. In R. W. Hefner (Ed.), Shari’a Politics: Islamic Law and Society in the Modern World (pp. 55–93). Indiana University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/griffith/detail.action?docID=713664. Wadud, A. (1999). Qur’an and woman: Rereading the Sacred Text from a Woman’s Perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. Welchman, L. (2004). Women’s rights and Islamic family law: Perspectives on Reform. Zed Books. Welchman, L. (2012). Musawah, CEDAW, and Muslim family laws in the 21st century. In Oxford University Press eBooks (pp. 309–320). https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199641444.003.0018 ----- Maddison Encarnação is a Political Science and International Relations undergraduate currently aspiring to work in research and humanitarian aid. She is especially passionate about enabling access to rights, freedoms, and security for all people. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islam-politics/engagement-cedaw-islamic-thought/d/137218 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism