Reconciling Shari’ah Principles with Modern Taxation Regimes: A Jurisprudential Dialogue on Zakat, Islamic Finance, and the Pakistani State

Abstract

This is a paper about silence in the law—a silence where reason, religion, and revenue cross paths and find no clear direction. The Constitution of Pakistan speaks of Islam. The tax code speaks of compliance. And the citizen, caught in between, asks a simple question: If I give what God requires, must I give again to the State? This research explores whether zakat, a divinely ordained obligation, can be reconciled with the modern taxation regime without offending either the letter of the law or the spirit of the Constitution. It examines the doctrinal contradictions, the institutional frictions, and the practical dilemmas that arise when sacred obligation meets statutory compulsion. Methodologically, the study is doctrinal and jurisprudential. It draws upon Pakistan’s constitutional provisions, tax laws, and administrative practice. It consults comparative models from countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia. And most importantly, it introduces a living jurisprudential dialogue—three imagined voices of the State: the tax officer, the rationalist, and the policy maker—each trying to make sense of a system they are part of but do not fully command. The article culminates in a hypothetical constitutional judgment—a bench reflection on the legal status of zakat in relation to income tax. The judgment dismisses the plea for substitution but calls for reform. Not more law, but better law. Not ideology, but design. The finding is clear: zakat and tax are not enemies—but unequal partners in a neglected conversation. This paper offers the structure for that conversation, and the jurisprudence to sustain it.