Paper short abstract:

The Ottoman legal reforms (mid-19th century) are usually described as an adoption of French laws and procedures explained in terms of westernization. This paper portrays the change as a move from a reactive judicial system into an activist one, which did not waive Ottoman legal concepts.

Paper long abstract:

The Ottoman legal reforms of the mid-19th century are usually described as an adoption of French laws and procedures. Furthermore, these changes are usually explained in terms of westernization. This paper portrays the change as a move from a reactive judicial concept to an activist one. In other words, the legal reforms were an outcome of a learned decision and a venue shopping.

The French inspired criminal courts established in the 1840s and the 1858 Ottoman Criminal Code did not carry with it waiving of Ottoman legal concepts. On the contrary, Judges were still the same personal serving in the Ottoman Sharia courts, and trained within the Ottoman legal school. The rule of evidence did not change. And the whole legal language remained pretty much the same. These phenomena were overseen until recently because studies focused on the written law, known as "law in the books."

Most strikingly is the fact that the Ottoman moral ethic of the law, aimed at protecting the weak, was amplified with the reforms, allowing the imperial government greater intervention in its subjects' lives. Criminal justice, policing, and incarceration are usually understood as a means aimed to impose tighter control over the masses. The legal reforms reinforced the conviction legal thinkers held that they hold the higher moral grounds.