Investigation of the Effect of the Judicial System on Economic Activities in the Ottoman State in Terms of Rationality
Authors: ALKAN Yaşar 
Published: December 2024

In the Western world of thought, the Ottoman judicial system is evaluated as irrational based on its characterization based on patrimonialism. Patrimonial forms of action correspond to an irrational position that polarizes the understanding of rationality. The arbitrary and subjective decisions of the administration in general and the sultan in particular contain a large part of these irrational claims. It is argued that the judicial system cannot objectively and fairly evaluate the parties in disputes that occur in economic life due to the arbitrary intervention of the sultan in the judges and the processes in which the trial is carried out. It is also stated that this situation, which creates many problems in economic life, hinders economic development. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the issue from various dimensions rather than only from Western thought. On the other hand, in addition to the professional difficulty faced by the members of the judiciary who were tasked with ensuring general and economic justice in the Ottoman Empire due to the pressure of the sultan in the decisions they made, the idea that the orderly functioning of this judicial system, which has been addressed since the foundation of the state, can be ensured by the effective fulfillment of the duties of the judicial institution and its members, also comes to the fore. While a large area is already being ruled, the urgent appointment of judges and administrative officers to all newly founded or conquered cities serves this purpose. These officers who carry out the orders of Islam regarding the legal system, are considered representatives on earth regarding the implementation of Allah’s laws because of their responsibilities. Therefore, while carrying out the duties assigned to them, they are expected to apply the imperative provisions of the verses by the nature of the issues they are faced with and with just and rational justifications. The supervisory mechanism also evaluates the relevant members of the judiciary within this framework. Indeed, in terms of legal and economic dimensions, it is important whether fair and proportionate decisions are taken in the cases brought by non-Muslims against Muslims and in the cases brought by Muslims against non-Muslims. Islam, which forms the basis of the Ottoman legal system and its functioning, reveals that everyone should be considered equal before the law/judiciary, regardless of their duties, titles, functions and ranks. Therefore, everyone, including foreigners, should be subject to equal and fair treatment before the judge in judicial and administrative cases. Accordingly, in accordance with justice, decisions should be also given against Muslims in disputes between Muslims and non-Muslims. The main thing is to ensure a fair trial and systematic. In this context, it is argued that there was no arbitrary, favouritist, unprincipled or unlawful trial in Ottoman law, and this argument is based on the rejection of trial methods that cannot be considered equal and fair in cases brought by the people against the ruling class or by the ruling military class against the peasants. The aim of the research is to reveal the extent to which these claims are compatible with the facts. The border of the study is the classical period. According to the results obtained, it has been revealed that the Ottoman judicial system generally operated independently of systematic and arbitrary interventions. Therefore, it has been determined that there is a generally fair mechanism for solving the problems that arose in economic life.