On October 12, 2025, Afghanistan’s Acting Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi made statements during a rare press conference in New Delhi, indicating that the Taliban government is not opposed to women’s education or empowerment. He specifically asserted that women’s and girls’ education “has not been declared ‘haram'” (forbidden under Islamic law). He further emphasized that the regime supports it within the framework of Sharia principles.
Muttaqi framed these policies as protective measures aligned with Islamic values, while addressing international concerns about restrictions. This declaration came amid pointed questions from journalists about the ongoing bans on girls’ secondary and higher education, women’s employment in many sectors, and mobility limitations.
However, Muttaqi did not announce any policy reversals, and the event drew criticism for being held without female journalists present, highlighting the irony of the venue’s gender-segregated setup.
Inconsistent approach towards women education from Taliban
Despite this rhetorical support, the Taliban’s actions remain inconsistent. As of October 2025, girls are still barred from secondary schools (beyond grade 6) and universities, with the ban extended to medical training in December 2024. In fact, the Afghan Education Minister recently confirmed in public statements that women’s access to formal schooling is “permanently closed,” reinforcing a system of gender apartheid. Also, broader empowerment efforts, such as women’s participation in public life or work, continue to be curtailed, with no female ministers or representatives in government.
The statements made in New Delhi appear to be aimed at improving international relations and countering diplomatic isolation. But freethinking individuals from Muslim heritage across continents think it is disingenuous, given the lack of implementation. Pro-Taliban voices on social media echo similar claims of “Islamic-compliant” education for women, but independent reports confirm over 1.1 million girls remain out of school.
ALSO READ: Viral pic of JD Vance, Charlie Kirk’s widow at TPUSA event triggers massive controversy
Since the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan in August 2021, the de facto authorities have systematically imposed over 70 decrees and laws that exclude women and girls from public life, severely curtailing their rights to education, movement, expression, work, and more. These policies, justified by the Taliban as compliance with their interpretation of Sharia law, have intensified in 2024–2025, creating an “institutionalized system of discrimination, segregation, and exclusion”, according to the Human Rights Watch site.
No restrictions have been reversed, and enforcement has grown harsher, including arbitrary detentions, floggings, and threats, amid an economic crisis affecting 23.7 million people in need of aid. This has led to a deepening gender crisis, with women facing isolation, poverty, mental health deterioration, and increased risks of gender-based violence (GBV) and child marriage.
Implications of Sharia-compliant women’s rights
What does Sharia-compliant women’s rights mean in the context of Muslim majority nations and regions where Muslims are in charge of policies or have influential Muslim pressure groups and lobbies under non-Muslim governments, like India? “Sharia-compliant women’s rights” refers to the framework of rights, obligations, and protections for women derived from or justified by interpretations of Sharia (Islamic law), which is based on the Quran, Hadith (sayings of Prophet Muhammad), ijma (scholarly consensus), and qiyas (analogical reasoning).
Sharia is not a monolithic code, but rather a highly interpretive one, leading to diverse applications. At its core, the Quran affirms women’s spiritual and moral equality with men (e.g., Quran 33:35), but specific rules on family, inheritance, and public life often reflect patriarchal historical contexts.
Interpretations fall along a spectrum:
Conservative (traditionalist) aproaches emphasize literal readings, prioritizing male guardianship (qiwama), complementary gender roles, and restrictions to “protect” women from fitna (temptation). This can limit autonomy in marriage, mobility, and testimony.
Progressive (reformist or Islamic feminist) approaches use ijtihad (independent reasoning) to prioritize maqasid al-Sharia (objectives like justice, equality, and welfare). Reformers argue for adapting rules to modern contexts, such as equal inheritance or rejecting polygamy, citing the Quran’s emphasis on equity (adl).
In countries where Muslims hold policy power—ranging from full Sharia states (e.g., Saudi Arabia, Iran) to hybrid systems (e.g., Indonesia, Pakistan)—”Sharia-compliant” women’s rights often blend religious doctrine with cultural norms. Over 50 Muslim-majority countries apply Sharia variably to family law, with 85% of surveyed Muslims believing wives should “always obey” husbands, per Pew Research. However, reforms driven by progressive voices have advanced rights in places like Tunisia.
What it really means for women
Conservative applications correlate with lower gender equality (e.g., Saudi Arabia ranks 131/146 on the WEF Gender Gap Index), fueling discrimination in 20+ countries. Progressive reforms, often by Muslim women scholars, have legalized women’s driving in Saudi Arabia (2018) and equalized ages of consent in Morocco (2004), framing them as fulfilling Sharia’s justice goals. Yet, backlash from conservative clerics persists, as in Iran’s 2022 protests over hijab laws.
In secular states like India, “Sharia-compliant” rights primarily apply via personal laws for Muslims (14% of population, ~200 million), governed by the Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937. This allows Muslims to opt for Sharia in family matters (marriage, divorce, inheritance), separate from Hindu or secular codes. Influential groups like the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) lobby to preserve these, arguing they protect religious identity against “uniform civil code” (UCC) pushes. Courts sometimes intervene for the sake of equity, creating a hybrid form of compliance.
So in conclusion, “Sharia-compliant” often masks cultural patriarchy rather than pure doctrine—progressive Muslims decry this as a distortion. Globally, UN critiques highlight violations (e.g., CEDAW reservations by 30+ Muslim states), but reformist movements, like Egypt’s Islamic feminists, show Sharia can evolve for equality. Ultimately, what the Afghan Minister meant was rights that are religiously sanctioned but contextually variable, often requiring zealous and reformist activism to align with social justice and gender equality.
