Triple talaq in India to interpretation by the ulama (class of Muslim legal scholars). The ulama of Hanafi Sunnis considered this form of divorce binding, provided the pronouncement was made in front of Muslim witnesses and later confirmed by a sharia court. However, the ulama of Ahl-i Hadith, Twelver and Musta'li persuasions did not regard it as proper. Scholar Aparna Rao states that, in 2003, there was an active debate among the ulama. In traditional Islamic jurisprudence, triple talaq is considered to be a particularly disapproved, but legally valid, form of divorce. Changing social conditions around the world have led to increasing dissatisfaction with
Sharia to enforce sharia restrictions on blasphemy and criticism of Islam over internet and social media. Sharia judicial proceedings have significant differences from other legal traditions, including those in both common law and civil law. Sharia courts traditionally do not rely on lawyers; plaintiffs and defendants represent themselves. Trials are conducted solely by the judge, and there is no jury system. There is no pre-trial discovery process, and no cross-examination of witnesses. Unlike common law, judges' verdicts do not set binding precedents under the principle of "stare decisis", and unlike civil law, sharia is left to the interpretation in each case