All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

The ruling on compensation for non-material (moral) harm differs according to its impact and its severity, and can accordingly be divided into two categories:

The first category: This is harm and detriment inflicted upon others — not in their wealth or their bodies, but rather in their religion, their dignity, their honor, or their reputation. This occurs through matters such as insults, defamation, or harm that is considered demeaning to a person, to the extent that it causes further tangible harm — such as loss of employment or business, damage to reputation, or illnesses requiring treatment. There is no sin in accepting compensation for this category, and this is the position adopted by the Jordanian Personal Status Law No. (15) of the year (2019), Article (155), as well as the Jordanian Civil Code No. (43) of the year (1976), Article (267).

This is supported by the following evidences from the books of fiqh:

What Imam as-Sarakhsī al-Ḥanafī (raḥimahullāh) said: "It has been narrated on the authority of Muḥammad [ibn al-Ḥasan] regarding wounds that heal without leaving any lasting trace, that a discretionary compensation (ḥukūmah) is due, proportionate to the pain suffered. And on the authority of Abū Yūsuf (raḥimahullāh), the victim may seek recourse against the offender for whatever was needed in terms of the cost of medicine and physicians' fees until the wound healed." [al-Mabsūṭ, Vol.26/P.81]

What Imam as-Subkī ash-Shāfi‘ī and others (raḥimahumullāh) relate: "Abū Isḥāq said: 'There are three matters in which I differ from my colleagues [in the madhhab]: the ḥadd punishment for slander (qadhf), the right of pre-emption (shuf‘ah), and marketplace seating spots — I permit reaching a settlement (ṣulḥ) [i.e., financial compensation] regarding them, while the rest of my colleagues disallow this, on the grounds that these are not [properly classified as] wealth (māl).'" [Takmilat al-Majmū‘, Vol.12/P.168]

What Imam Sirāj ad-Dīn al-Bulqīnī ash-Shāfi‘ī (raḥimahullāhu ta‘ālā) relates: "'Waiving the ḥadd punishment for slander is not to be matched with any form of compensation, according to the more correct view.' It has been said regarding this: the same two positions apply to waiving the right of pre-emption, marketplace seating spots, and the right of return due to a defect [in a sale]. He then mentions the view of Abū Isḥāq, saying: 'The Imam [al-Ḥaramayn] relates from him in an-Nihāyah that he said: I differed from my colleagues in three matters. They say: no compensation may be taken in exchange for [waiving] the ḥadd punishment for slander. And I say: it may be taken.'" [al-Fawā'id al-Jisām ‘alā Qawā‘id Ibn ‘Abd as-Salām, Vol.1/P.407]

The second category: This is harm that does not touch a person's religion, dignity, or honor — matters that carry no real weight or bearing within the scale of the Sharī‘ah, or whose harm is so minor that it has no meaningful effect on people's lives, their work, or their feelings. Compensation is not permissible for this category.

Accordingly: if the moral/non-material harm constitutes a genuine violation of rights, and inflicts real harm and detriment upon others, then the aggrieved party may seek punishment of the offender, or a financial penalty (taghrīm) against him as compensation for the offense committed. This is warranted in light of the necessities of the present age, and the new and evolving forms of defamation and genuine harm that have emerged. It should be noted that discretionary financial penalties for non-material harm are considered appropriate given the changing nature of the times and the public interest involved — while affirming that this financial compensation does not thereby permit the taking of legal/contractual interest, or a financial penalty for late payment of debts, since these are matters of an entirely different nature. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.