How global fatwas on Gaza challenge national religious authority

In March 2025, the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS) issued a global fatwa declaring armed jihad against Israel a fardhu ‘ain—a personal obligation for every able-bodied Muslim. The declaration called for total mobilisation: military engagement, economic boycotts and full embargoes against Israel and its allies. Describing the war in Gaza as a “systematic genocide”, the IUMS urged Muslims worldwide to act in religious solidarity with the Palestinian people.

Rather than achieving unity, however, the fatwa sparked controversy and institutional resistance. Egypt’s Dar al-Ifta, one of the most respected Islamic legal authorities, rejected the fatwa and argued that the prerogative to declare armed jihad lies solely with legitimate state institutions. It warned that such declarations, when issued without formal jurisdiction, could lead to confusion and instability within the Muslim world.

In Indonesia, the fatwa generated domestic uncertainty. A public comment by Sudarnoto Abdul Hakim, Head of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation at the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), was widely interpreted as an endorsement of the IUMS stance. However, his statement was not issued through MUI’s Fatwa Commission and did not follow formal procedures such as decree issuance, institutional registration or coordinated public release. The misunderstanding contradicted MUI’s established approach, which insists that expressions of solidarity must remain within the bounds of national law and Islamic ethics.

READ: 30 Palestinians killed, 150 injured as Israeli forces open fire on aid seekers in southern Gaza

Since its inception, MUI has consistently advocated for religious moderation and civic responsibility. Its organisational principles discourage unsanctioned calls to violence and emphasise Islamic teachings that promote peace and social harmony. Institutional reforms over the past two decades have reflected this commitment, embedding ethical engagement and public accountability within MUI’s operational vision.

MUI’s position on Palestine is well established. Fatwa No. 83/2023 affirms support for Palestinian independence as a religious obligation, but it outlines clear parameters: prayer, public education, fundraising, diplomatic advocacy and multilateral engagement through organisations such as the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). These actions provide an ethical framework for solidarity while respecting Indonesia’s legal structure and constitutional values. In contrast, the IUMS fatwa risks dislocating religious obligation from institutional context, creating tension between personal conviction and civic responsibility.

A fatwa is never merely a personal opinion; it is a normative instrument. When framed without institutional legitimacy or geopolitical sensitivity, it may disrupt social cohesion and obscure ethical priorities. This concern becomes more acute when viewed in light of IUMS’s trajectory as a transnational actor. Founded in 2004 by Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a prominent Egyptian cleric known for his ideological leadership in Islamic political thought, the IUMS has positioned itself as a global platform for religious mobilisation, often issuing declarations aligned with political causes. Though Qaradawi passed away, his legacy continues under the current leadership. Despite internal shifts, the union maintains a pattern of highly charged pronouncements that often challenge national religious frameworks.

In today’s interconnected world, a fatwa is no longer a locally confined edict; it circulates rapidly across borders and platforms, often separated from legal nuance, national realities and theological rigour. This flattening effect renders such declarations vulnerable to misinterpretation, particularly when amplified through digital channels that disregard institutional checks. Without careful guidance, transnational fatwas may inspire action unmoored from legal responsibility, community dialogue or peaceful consensus.

READ: Hamas calls for UN investigation into Israel’s killing of aid seekers in Gaza

The rise of transnational fatwas signals a shift in how religious authority is shaped in the digital age. Traditional centres of Islamic scholarship, which once derived their legitimacy from institutional continuity, geographical rootedness and interpretive rigour, now face increasing competition from decentralised religious networks operating through social media and digital platforms. In this new environment, the persuasive power of a fatwa often hinges less on its legal coherence and more on its emotional immediacy, moral absolutism and capacity to circulate rapidly across borders.

This presents a profound challenge for national religious institutions. On one hand, they must remain responsive to public sentiment, particularly in moments of crisis that evoke widespread outrage. On the other, they are obliged to uphold constitutional norms, safeguard national unity and ensure that religious guidance remains legally sound and socially constructive. Institutions such as the Indonesian Ulema Council navigate this tension by reinforcing procedural standards for religious declarations, thereby maintaining the integrity of Islamic discourse within a democratic constitutional framework.

What is at stake is not merely a theological dispute but a contest between competing models of religious legitimacy. One model prioritises ethical restraint, institutional accountability and alignment with civic values. The other privileges immediacy, moral urgency and global mobilisation. Rather than suppressing these tensions, it is essential to cultivate a religious public capable of critical discernment—an ummah that understands that justice requires patience, wisdom and contextual sensitivity, not only passionate conviction.

The case of Gaza evokes deep emotion and moral urgency. But empathy must not override the principles of clarity, legality and accountability. Religious solidarity must emerge from rational reflection, not reactive sentiment. The pursuit of justice for Palestine is a shared moral commitment, but it must not come at the expense of constitutional order or national integrity. Upholding the sanctity of religious guidance requires that fatwas—especially those addressing conflict—be rooted in the ethics of responsibility, not rhetoric.

Blind adherence (taqlid) cannot serve a complex global ummah. What is needed instead is tabayyun—a spirit of discernment, contextual awareness and critical engagement. The most pressing challenge facing Muslims today is not the absence of passion, but the absence of clarity amid competing calls to action.

OPINION: How humanitarian aid became a tool to empty Gaza

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.