Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to examine a ruler's ta'assuf (abuse) in the exercise of rights in light of the legal maxim, "the ruler's conduct toward the subjects is contingent upon the public interest (maṣlaḥa)." It seeks to assess the suitability of the theory of abuse of rights as a framework for evaluating and regulating the conduct of rulers within Islamic jurisprudence, and to clarify its roots in classical legal literature. Methods: The study adopts an inductive approach to analyze classical juristic texts addressing concepts such as transgression, harm, and exceeding lawful limits. It also employs an analytical method to examine the Sharī'a foundations of the legal maxim, the criteria of recognized public interest, and the juristic and legal standards of ta'assuf. In addition, a descriptive and applied approach is used to evaluate contemporary cases, including taxation, administrative measures, and deprivation of nationality. Conclusions: The study concludes that the theory of abuse of rights constitutes a valid scholarly tool for assessing governmental conduct. Ta'assuf refers to the harmful exercise of a legitimate right, whereas transgression results from unlawful conduct from the outset. Many contemporary governmental practices may fall under ta'assuf when they rely on legitimate authority yet contradict the requirements of recognized public interest. Any act that lacks such interest or leads to manifest harm is invalid under Islamic law. Clarifying these principles remains a scholarly duty in furtherance of the objectives of the Sharī'a.