Hisbe Organization

The Hisbe institution, is an official oversight body operating in Islamic societies in accordance with the principle of enjoining good and forbidding evil, aimed at preserving public morality and order. This institution, whose roots extend back to the time of Prophet Muhammad, has throughout history been endowed with administrative and limited judicial powers covering a wide spectrum from economic activities to social life. Its historical significance lies in having alone assumed the functions of today’s municipal services, regulatory bodies, and market oversight institutions.

The historical trajectory of the Hisbe institution paralleled the expansion of Islamic states and the growing bureaucratic demands. Significant differences exist between its earliest applications and its final institutional form in the Ottoman period, particularly in terms of the scope of authority and administrative hierarchy.

^{Scale Sellers in the Ottoman Empire (}İntizami⁾

The first practical implementer of Hisbe activities was Prophet Muhammad himself, who personally inspected the market in Medina. In one such inspection, he discovered a grain merchant hiding wet wheat beneath dry wheat and prohibited this deceptive practice with the declaration “He who deceives us is not one of us,” which is regarded as the first application of the institution’s core economic oversight mission.^【1】 During this period, market supervision was not carried out by a bureaucratic apparatus but directly by the leader or his appointed individuals.

One of the most notable features of this era was the appointment of female Companions to Hisbe duties based on merit. Women such as Shifaa bint Abdullah and Samra bint Nuhayk al-Asadiyya were commissioned by Prophet Muhammad and later by Caliph Umar to oversee the market.^【2】 During Caliph Umar’s reign, Hisbe acquired the full identity of a formalized institution. Umar personally patrolled the streets of Medina and appointed Sa'id ibn al-As as muhtasib in Mecca and Abdullah ibn Utba in Medina, transforming the institution into a systematic state organ.^【3】

During the Umayyad and especially the Abbasid periods, Hisbe was granted much broader powers for maintaining social order and morality. The Abbasid muhtasib no longer limited his duties to market supervision; he intervened in nearly every aspect of social life, including ensuring street cleanliness, resolving neighborhood disputes, and punishing those who mistreated animals.^【4】

In the Umayyads of Al-Andalus, Hisbe was implemented under the name “Hattu’l-Ihtisab,” and appointments were typically made from among judges or prominent jurists. Andalusian muhtasibs developed an original inspection mechanism by secretly sending a child or servant dressed in civilian clothing to suspicious shops to make purchases, thereby identifying and punishing merchants who used false weights or charged prices above the regulated limits.^【5】

During the Seljuk period, Hisbe became an independent institution administered under the name “Divan-i Hisbe” and emerged as one of the foundational councils of the government. Nizam al-Mulk emphasized the importance of this institution in his work Siyasatnama, warning that without muhtasib oversight, fraud in the marketplace would increase, the poor would suffer hardship, and social order would collapse.^【6】 Historical cases attest to the power and impartial enforcement authority of the institution. During the reign of Ghaznavid Mahmud, when the commander-in-chief of a 50,000-strong army, Ali Nuvishtakin, was seen publicly intoxicated during daytime, a force of one hundred men under the muhtasib’s command removed him from his horse and personally punished him.^【7】

Sultan Mahmud supported the physical punishment of one of the highest-ranking military officers as a matter of justice. Similarly, during the reign of Ghaznavid Sultan Ibrahim, when bakers hoarded wheat to create artificial scarcity and refused to sell bread to the public, the state’s chief baker was executed, his corpse tied to an elephant’s tusk, and severe measures were taken to enforce market regulation.^【8】

^{Hisbe Denetimi (Yapay Zeka İle Oluşturulmuştur)}

The Hisbe institution reached its most advanced and institutionalized bureaucratic form in the Ottoman State. In the Ottoman context, this institution was commonly referred to as “ihtisap ağalığı” or “ihtisap eminliği,” and muhtasibs operated under the jurisdiction of the judge, blending Sharia and customary law. While in earlier states the muhtasib served as the direct representative of the judge or caliph, during the Ottoman expansion period he evolved into an autonomous market regulator.

In 1826, the institution was restructured from “Ihtisap Ağalığı” into the “Ihtisap Nezareti,” bringing regulatory affairs directly under the Grand Vizier and approaching the model of a modern ministry. However, with the establishment of the police organization in 1845 and the Zabıta Müşiriyeti in 1846, the muhtasib’s general public order, police, and security powers were transferred to these new institutions, and his duties were restricted solely to trade practices, production standards, and price (narh) regulation, thereby forming the first model of today’s independent regulatory authorities.^【9】

The enforcement and oversight powers vested in the muhtasib necessitated strict criteria for appointment. The individual appointed as muhtasib had to be legally competent, free, Muslim, just, well-versed in jurisprudential rules, and possess sufficient social standing to ensure the acceptance of his decisions by the public.

The appointment of the muhtasib was not by election but by central authority. Central muhtasibs were appointed directly by the head of state (caliph or sultan) or by the Grand Vizier with his approval, while provincial muhtasibs were appointed through the central muhtasib or the regional administrative authority (judge). In regions such as Al-Andalus, the opinions of judges were consulted in appointments, but the final decision always rested with the ruler. The position of muhtasib was an official civil post, and holding any other occupation was prohibited.

Independence was fundamental during the term of office, and dismissal was permitted only under specific conditions such as committing an offense against the head of state, demonstrating incompetence in duty, or becoming physically incapable. The muhtasib had the authority to use assistants known as “koloğlanları” or directly deploy shurta (police/guard) forces to enforce his decisions.

The salary and financing system of the muhtasib evolved in accordance with the state’s financial structure over time. In the Anatolian Seljuks and early Ottoman periods, the Hisbe institution was not funded from the general budget but operated under the “iltizam” system. The individual holding the title of “ihtisap ağası” would pay a fixed sum known as “mukataa bedeli” to the state in exchange for the right to administer Hisbe in a region for one year. The muhtasib’s primary income consisted of taxes collected from merchants, known as “ihtisab resmi,” levied on the sealing of measuring instruments and inspections. However, this system was gradually abandoned due to its tendency to encourage corruption and bribery among tax collectors.

To preserve the integrity of regulation and ensure that muhtasibs could make impartial and bribery-free decisions, the ihtisab resmi was deposited into the state treasury, and muhtasibs received a high salary directly from the state treasury (bayt al-mal). Islamic jurists such as Imam Abu Yusuf argued that assigning a substantially high salary from the treasury to these market regulators was essential for just governance, as it safeguarded them from the temptation of bribery.^【10】

The duties of the muhtasib went beyond superficial notions of “general morality”; they encompassed concrete legal actions with tangible penalties. In scope, the muhtasib differed from the judge: he could not adjudicate complex legal cases requiring denial, witness testimony, or oaths. He intervened only in cases where wrongdoing or fraud was openly visible and required no further investigation, applying the principle of “immediate justice.” His concrete responsibilities included:

• Measurement and Weight Control: Ensuring that scales, dirhems, and other units of weight and length used in the market met established standards; immediately punishing and destroying fraudulent instruments used for underweighting or overcharging.
• Quality and Production Oversight: Preventing the production of fraudulent or harmful goods. For example, intervening against bakeries producing bread below the prescribed weight, destroying meat from butchers selling spoiled or foul-smelling meat, and preventing deceptive practices such as diluting milk or hiding wet goods beneath dry ones.
• Price Control (Narh) and Hoarding (Ihtikar): Preventing unjust price increases or artificial shortages caused by hoarding goods (ihtikar). Monitoring compliance with state-set price limits (narh) and preventing monopolistic middlemen from buying goods cheaply from outside the city and reselling them at inflated prices.
• Debt and Claim Intervention: Upon complaint, immediately intervening against debtors who deliberately delayed payment despite having the financial means, ensuring prompt fulfillment of the creditor’s right.

• Construction and Physical Environment: Inspecting buildings from their foundations, verifying compliance of construction materials with standards, preventing unauthorized balconies or overhangs that obstruct pedestrian or vehicle passage, and intervening against stalls that encroach upon public pathways.
• Public Health and Sanitation: Issuing licenses for commercial establishments; inspecting bathhouses for hygiene compliance and closing those that failed to meet standards; preventing butchers from dumping bloody hides on public roads, which caused environmental pollution and foul odors.
• Public and Animal Rights: Organizing repairs of neglected or damaged water channels and roads; preventing excessive loads on transport animals or beasts of burden; ensuring streets were properly lit and kept clean.

The muhtasib had the authority to determine and impose penalties for violations he detected. Initially, he would explain the wrongdoing and offer counsel. If the offense was repeated or serious, he would proceed to reprimand, confiscate and destroy tools used in the violation (e.g., false scales), and apply further sanctions. Depending on the severity of the offense, punishments directly enforceable by the muhtasib included imprisonment, public shaming, permanent banishment from a trade, physical punishment (beating), and exile. However, he had no authority to impose capital punishment or penalties prescribed under Islamic law for hudud crimes such as murder; such cases were referred to the judge, and the muhtasib’s role was limited to overseeing the execution of the judge’s ruling.