n January 2026, the Taliban notified a new Criminal Procedure Code across Afghanistan, presenting it as a legal reform intended to regulate courts and standardise criminal justice. Signed Mullah Hibatullah Akhundzada, the supreme Taliban leader, the document was circulated to all provincial courts and declared binding law in Taliban-controlled territories. The code consists of several chapters governing criminal responsibility, punishments, judicial authority, religious belief, political loyalty, social conduct and family life. While it has been framed as procedural legislation, its scope extends far beyond courtroom mechanics, reshaping many aspects of public and private existence under Taliban rule.

The new Criminal Procedure Code fundamentally restructures Afghanistan’s justice system around ideological obedience and rigid social hierarchy. It introduces a class-based legal order, restricts religious identity to a single approved interpretation, criminalises dissent and criticism, expands corporal punishment and grants sweeping discretionary powers to Taliban authorities. Essential safeguards of justice—such as equality before the law, legal clarity, presumption of innocence and protection from arbitrary punishment—are either absent or have been systematically undermined. Under this system courts are to operate less as institutions of justice and more as enforcement mechanisms designed to maintain Taliban authority.

The notification of the code is meant to expand government control rather than ensure administration of justice. Recognition of voluntary religious identity is limited. Religious disagreement, criticism of Taliban rulings and support for alternative beliefs have been criminalised. Under the pretext of “public interest” and “protection of religion,” the code authorises lethal punishment for individuals accused of religious deviation. Ideological obedience has been made a legal obligation, making belief itself a matter of criminal liability. Law is thus to be a tool not for resolving disputes or ensuring fairness, but for enforcing conformity and silencing opposition.

Ali Asghar, an advocate, says that one of the most controversial features of the code is the formal reorganisation of Afghan society into four classes: scholars, elites, middle class and lower class. For the same offenses, scholars may receive advice, elites face summons, middle-class individuals are to be imprisoned and lower-class citizens subjected to imprisonment as well as corporal punishment. This discrimination institutionalises privilege at the heart of the legal system. Insult to or ridicule of Taliban leadership carries penalties of flogging and imprisonment; failure by bystanders to report opposition activity has been made a crime. Cultural practices such as dancing and watching dance performances have also been defined as criminal acts.

The new law restructures Afghanistan’s justice system around ideological obedience and rigid social hierarchy. It introduces a class-based legal order, restricts religious identity to a single approved interpretation, criminalises dissent and criticism and expands corporal punishment.

Traditionally, Islamic jurisprudence has been unequivocal in affirming that all individuals are equal before law, regardless of lineage, wealth and social status. The Quran, the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the practices of the Rightly Guided Caliphs consistently emphasise impartial justice. Punishments in Islam are determined by the nature of one’s actions, not by class or power. The new Taliban code contradicts this foundational principle. This is the very discrimination condemned by the prophet (peace be upon him), who warned that nations are ruined when the powerful among them are spared punishment while the weak are penalised.

Advocate Asghar says that the new code also treats dissent as a crime. Opposition to Taliban rule has been defined as corruption, rebellion and defiance of Islamic order and made punishable by death. Criticism and ridicule of Taliban leaders is to be punished by flogging and imprisonment. Silence, too, has been made a crime through the mandatory reporting requirement. Islamic governance historically emphasised accountability of rulers rather than their sanctification. Public questioning of authority was not only tolerated but encouraged under early Islamic leaders. The Taliban code replaces this tradition with fear, enforced silence and absolute obedience, obliterating the distinction between political power and religious authority.

The brunt of this framework will be borne by the weakest of Afghan citizens. Power will guarantee protection and poverty invite punishment. Such an arrangement is in direct opposition to Islam’s emphasis on social justice, welfare and protection of the vulnerable. Instead of uplifting the marginalised, the law threatens to deepen inequality and normalise suffering as a mechanism of governance.

Women are to face censure even for visiting their parents without their husbands’ permission. They face imprisonment if they refuse to return. Husbands (and male guardians) can administer punishment. This effectively legalises domestic violence. Violence against women is a cognizable offence only in cases of severe visible injury. Psychological abuse, sexual violence and coercive control go unrecognised. Islamic jurisprudence has traditionally recognised women as independent moral and legal persons with rights to dignity, consent and protection. Reducing them to controlled dependents has no basis in Islamic teachings.

One of the most alarming elements of the code is its legal recognition of slavery. This revives a condition Islam sought to dismantle by consistently encouraging emancipation and emphasising , human dignity. Normalising slavery represents a regression that contradicts both Islamic ethics and modern human rights standards.

From a modern governance perspective, the new Criminal Procedure Code represents institutional failure. Effective states depend on legal uniformity, accountability, transparency and protection of basic rights. The Taliban framework, however, rejects these principles in favour of unchecked authority and ideological enforcement. This could deepen Afghanistan’s international isolation, weaken internal stability and erode the prospect of public trust in legal institutions.

The notification of this Criminal Procedure Code is no advance towards implementation of shariah. Instead, it reflects the isolation of a leadership imposing a distorted interpretation of Islam to preserve its power rather than uphold justice.

The author works for The News. He can be contacted at [email protected]