Created by muslims for muslims

Khalifa is an Arabic word literally meaning "one who replaces someone else who left or died" (English: caliph). In the context of Islam, however, the word acquires a narrower meaning. The Muslim Khalifa is the successor (in a line of successors) to Prophet Muhammad's position as the political, military, and administrative leader of the Muslims. The prophetic role of Muhammad is strictly not included in this definition, as the Qur'an and Hadith clearly state that Muhammad was the last of the prophets. Khilafa is a related Arabic word which, in the context of Islam, is used to denote the government of the Muslim state, of which the Khalifa is the head. A workable analogy of Khalifa and Khilafa is president and presidency or king and monarchy. The Khilafa is a fard kifaya on the ummah.

1.2 The duties and responsibilities of the Khalifa

The Khalifa of the Muslim ummah must strive to :

Safeguard Islam in its original form, and to protect against the introduction of new things (bid'a) into Islam.

Establish justice (including punishments for crimes) among the people.

Ensure the protection of the ummah. People within the boundaries of the Muslim state (regardless of whether they are Muslims or not) should feel secure enough to be productive.

Protect the physical boundaries of the state through the use of arms and other methods.

Defend the rights of Muslims abroad, and to see to it that Islam can spread freely in non-Muslim lands (including the use of force).

Organize jihad against any non-Muslim government which prevents Muslim da'wah from entering its land.

Collect and distribute zakat and the spoils of war according to the Qur'an and Sunnah (and ijtihad, if necessary). This must be done without the use of fear as an incentive (unless a person refuses to pay). Zakat is not to be taken from the best or worst of people's possessions, but rather from the middle.

Pay the salaries of Bayt-ul-Mal employees, i.e., those people whose job is the collection of zakat and other state-levied taxes. Their salaries should be reasonable and be paid on time.

Hire honest people as helpers, aides, governors, etc. The Khalifa must appoint to public office those who are competent and who can give good advice. This especially applies to Bayt-ul-Mal officials.

Be heavily involved personally in the acts of governing. The Khalifa must be actively checking and overseeing the duties of the government, and constantly be guarding against internal corruption.

1.3 The prerequisites to becoming the Khalifa

Muslim scholars have determined certain criteria which any possible candidate for the Khalifa must meet to be considered legitimate.

The Khalifa must be Muslim.

He must be a man. This condition is based on the hadith where the Prophet states that a nation would not profit under a woman as its leader.

He must be knowledgeable in Islam, and be able to make independent decisions if necessary.

He must be just, have good morals, and be trustworthy.

He must be physically able (non-handicapped), spiritual, brave, and helpful to protect the ummah against its enemies. His eyes, ears, tongue, and body in general should be in working condition. The point here is to stress an independent, dynamic leader for the sake of the ummah, not to discriminate against the physically handicapped. Today, for example, an artificial limb could be used to offset an otherwise crippling injury.

He must be politically, militarily, and administratively experienced.

He must be from the tribe of Quraish because they used to be the leading tribe, the majority. The Prophet has said, "The Khalifas are Quraishi." However, many Muslim scholars have commented on this prerequisite. Al-Mawardi has written that the Khalifa should be Quraishi based on the saying of Abu Bakr that the Khalifas are Quraishi and their ministers are non-Quraishi. The majority of scholars are of this opinion. Other scholars have arrived at a different conclusion. Abu Bakr Al-Baqlani has said that the leader of the Muslims simply should be from the majority. Muhammad Riya-Ad-Deen and Abu Hanifa wrote that the leader must come from the majority to make it easy to follow him.

1.4 How the Khalifa may be chosen

There are three ways in which the Muslim ummah may choose a new Khalifa. However, in all three cases, the people are obligated to give the new Khalifa their bay'a once the process of choosing him is over. People can send representatives to give their bay'a if the population is large. The three ways of choosing the Khalifa are by selection, by nomination, and by force.

By selection. The Khalifa is selected by a group of the best, most Islamically knowledgeable people in the society (not by a general vote of everyone). This group is called the Majlis-Ash-Shura (Arabic for "consultative council"). The members of the Majlis-ash-Shura are chosen from experts who are learned in Islam, and they in turn choose the Khalifa. If the society as a whole rejects their choice, the Majlis-ash-Shura must find out why, perhaps negotiate with the people, and in general try to resolve the problem - however, this situation has never occurred. The Majlis-ash-Shura must have at least three people by the definition of a jama'a (a group of three or more people). The Muslim scholar Al-Mawardi has noted that in the emergency case of no Khalifa and no Majlis-ash-Shura (the situation today), the people should create two parties: one being the Majlis-ash-Shura, and the other being a list of candidates for the Khalifa. The Majlis-ash-Shura then selects a Khalifa from the list of candidates.

By nomination. The current Khalifa may nominate his successor, the next Khalifa (as Abu Bakr did with Umar). The people have to accept him just as in the first case. If the old Khalifa appoints someone unworthy out of ulterior motives, the people must reject that appointee.

By force. If the current Khalifa forces someone on the people to be the next Khalifa, but that person is righteous, the people must accept him as long as he remains righteous. Similarly, if there is no Khalifa (again, the situation today), it is permitted for someone to forcibly seize power and declare himself the Khalifa if he guarantees to abide by his responsibilities under Islam.

1.5 The Majlis-Ash-Shura

There is no fixed size for this group, however, it is generally agreed that it should not be too large. Muslim scholars have established some basic prerequisites which the members of the Majlis-ash-Shura should have to become part of that group. All agree that the members must be adults (in Islam, this means anyone who has entered puberty), and of sound mind. These members are chosen by the various communities in the ummah. Other prerequisites, while generally agreed upon, differ slightly from scholar to scholar.

Al-Mawardi has written that each member should satisfy three conditions: he must be just, he must have enough knowledge of Islam to differentiate between a potentially good Khalifa and a bad one, and he must have sufficient wisdom and judgment to select the best leader.

Al-Juwayni has four conditions for the Majlis-ash-Shura: each member must be a man, knowledgeable, above average relatively, and Muslim.

Abdul-Jabbar is of the opinion that the members must have enough knowledge to select he who can be Khalifa - enough Islamic knowledge in particular, and wisdom and judgment in general.

Muhammad Rida wrote that the Majlis-ash-Shura should be the best of the ummah, composed of the scholars, leaders, soldiers, businessmen, and respected people of the society. All the members should have deep knowledge of Islam as a basic prerequisite. They must be people whose opinions and decisions are obeyed and respected. The Majlis-ash-Shura should have people from many fields of expertise to ensure a broad base of support and knowledge.

Faiyadh has written that the Majlis-ash-Shura serves as an intermediary between the people and the Khalifa. The most qualified people to be in the Majlis-ash-Shura are the leaders of the different 'tribes', the Muslim scholars, and those experienced in life (i.e., experts in non-Islamic fields like economics, engineering, medicine, etc.). These are also the ones who represent the ummah and who can speak against the ummah.

Al-Baghdadi believed that the Khalifa and the Majlis-ash-Shura should be selected from amongst those who can choose wisely.

1.6 How the Majlis-ash-Shura selects the Khalifa

There are four conditions which must be met for the Majlis-ash-Shura to legitimately select a new Khalifa.

· There must currently be no existing Khalifa.

· A qualified and willing individual must accept his nomination by the Majlis-ash-Shura.

· The nominee must have been selected freely by the Majlis-ash-Shura - and the members of the Majlis-ash-Shura must give him their bay'a.

· The bay'a must be given to the nominee by the general populace - though some scholars say this is optional.

Some scholars believe that the bay'a should be given in the presence of two witnesses, whereas other scholars believe this is unnecessary since selecting the Khalifa is a public matter.

When the Majlis-ash-Shura votes for the Khalifa, the members must formally select one of the candidates, and there must be no objection against that candidate which can be supported by evidence. However, Muslim scholars have differed on the number of members in the Majlis-ash-Shura needed to select a Khalifa from the list of candidates.

Some scholars say that at least a majority of the Majlis-ash-Shura must agree on the new Khalifa.

Al-Ashari believes the Khalifa could be given to an eligible person even by a single vote if he comes from the Majlis-ash-Shura and has a good Islamic character. There must also be no valid objection supported by evidence or witnesses.

Another group of scholar's opinion is that the Khalifa must have two votes for him in the Majlis-ash-Shura who are good Muslims (two because the Majlis-ash-Shura is a jama'a which is at least three people).

A fourth opinion is that the Khalifa must have four votes (with no countering objection) because witnessing to a charge of adultery in Islam requires four witnesses.

A fifth opinion holds that at least three votes are necessary to make the decision have the strength of a jama'a behind it.

A sixth opinion is that at least five votes are needed to make an even stronger decision.

Finally, a seventh group of scholars believes that it requires 40 members of the Majlis-ash-Shura to vote for the same candidate for him to become the new Khalifa since Friday prayer requires 40 people to be valid (according to some scholars).

1.7 Using force to choose the Khalifa

One way the Khalifa may be chosen is through the use of force. Many Muslim scholars say that if a person has already seized power, then to avoid Muslim bloodshed that person should be accepted if he upholds his duties as the Khalifa of the Muslim ummah.

Ibn Hanbal wrote that if a Khalifa has seized power, it is haram to fight him. However, he must meet his responsibilities under Islam.

Ash-Shafi'i believed that a person who seizes power and then is accepted by the people is a legitimate Khalifa.

An-Nawawi believed that if someone forces himself on the ummah, but is qualified, then he should be accepted by the people to avoid Muslim bloodshed and to preserve Muslim unity. An-Nawawi also claimed that if the new Khalifa subsequently does not follow the sunnah of the Prophet precisely, it would be still be questionable to fight against him because of the paramount importance of avoiding Muslim bloodshed and disunity.

Ibn Khaldun, Al-Asqalani and Al-Juwayni all believed that forceful seizure of power by someone is legitimate as long as he follows Islam as the new Khalifa.

Ibn Taymiya wrote that after someone has seized power, he is legitimate so long as he follows the Qur'an and Sunnah.

All scholars are in unanimous agreement that using force to displace an already established Khalifa who is meeting his responsibilities is forbidden.

The above scholars rely on the following ahadith to support their opinions.

From Sahih Muslim: A companion of the Prophet named Hudhayfah asked the Prophet about what the future holds for the Muslims. The Prophet replied that they will be led by devils at some point.

The Prophet then added that the Muslims should obey these leaders.

From Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim : The Prophet noted that there will come leaders whom the Muslims will not like - that is, they will not follow the Sunnah precisely. The Prophet continued and ordered the Muslims to "give your right to them, and ask God for your right," or in other words be patient.

From Sahih Muslim : The Prophet asked people for their bay'a in which he asked for obedience during weakness and strength, wealth and poverty. This request for obedience from the people applies to the Khalifas as well unless they exhibit signs of kufr.

1.8 Disobeying and removing the Khalifa

Many Muslim scholars have commented on when it is permissible to disobey or remove the Khalifa, which is normally forbidden when the Khalifa is meeting all his responsibilities under Islam.

Al-Mawardi believed that if the Khalifa has followed the Qur'an and Sunnah, the people must follow and support him. On the other hand, if he becomes either unjust or handicapped to the point of ineffectiveness (such as blindness or an amputation), then he must be removed.

Al-Baghdadi believed that if the Khalifa deviates from justice, the ummah needs to warn him first to return to the straight path. If this fails, then he can be removed.

Al-Juwayni held that since Islam is the goal of the ummah, any Khalifa who steps away from this goal must be removed.

Ashighistani wrote that if the Khalifa is found to be ignorant, oppressive, indifferent, or a kafir after his selection, then he must be removed.

Al-Ghazali believed that an oppressive Khalifa must be told to desist from his crimes. If he does not, then he must be removed.

Al-Iji believed the ummah has a definite list of permissible reasons to remove the Khalifa.

Al-Asqalani wrote that if the Khalifa starts to act as an unbeliever, it is prohibited to obey him and obligatory to fight him. It is obligatory to stand against him if one can - and this entails a big reward. Those people who choose to ignore the situation are in sin, whereas those who cannot fight should emigrate (to organize resistance). Al-Asqalani used two ayahs from the Qur'an in particular to support his position. The first is from surat Al-Ahzab 67-68, "...And they would say, 'Our Lord! We obeyed our chiefs and our great ones, and they deceived us as to the right path. Our Lord! Give them a double penalty and curse them with a very great curse'...", and the second is from surat Al-Baqara 167, "...And those who followed would say, 'If only we had one more chance, we would clear ourselves of them, as they have cleared themselves of us.' Thus will Allah show them (the fruits of) their deeds as (nothing but) regrets. Nor will there be a way for them out of the Fire..."

Muslim reported that Ibn Umar said the Prophet ordered every Muslim to obey their leader unless commanded to do something bad, in which case they must neither obey nor listen. Muslim also reported that Ibn Malik said the best leader is the one where mutual love exists between him and the people, and the worst leader generates mutual hate. However, even in the latter case, fighting the Khalifa is prohibited unless he enters kufr by stopping prayers or zakat for example.

Ibn As-Samit reported that the Prophet said to obey him in all things and situations, and not to remove the leaders unless they openly practice kufr.

Abu Daud reports from Ibn Ujrah that the Prophet entered a masjid, and said there will come leaders after him who disobey the Qur'an and Allah. Those who help them are not of the Muslims, but if someone opposes them, he or she is of the Prophet's people.

The Khalifa must be seriously and unrepentantly off the straight path if he is to be accused of kufr. Actions like neglecting prayers, ignoring the fast, and claiming that the Qur'an and Sunnah are outdated are the types of crimes that indicate kufr on the part of the Khalifa. In such circumstances, he must be warned quietly first before taking any physical action against him. However, in cases where the Khalifa is not a kafir, but is simply very belligerent (e.g., seizing the land of others unjustly), the people are obligated to yield their rights (including possessions) to avoid bloodshed. Instead, they should pray to Allah to restore their rights.

1.9 Who has the authority to remove a bad Khalifa

In a the event of a bad Khalifa, the Majlis-ash-Shura must be the voice of the ummah which steps forward and orders the Khalifa to step down (although they must warn the Khalifa first of his crimes). If there is no Majlis-ash-Shura, the general populace must create one first by nominating and appointing people to form it. No individuals should rise up alone in protest against the Khalifa. Muslim scholars have elaborated on this subject extensively.

Al-Juwayni has written that if the Khalifa acts strangely and is leading the Muslims to weakness, the ummah should not allow individuals to step forward and challenge the Khalifa because this leads to anarchy. Rather, any change must go through the Majlis-ash-Shura.

Al-Mindad believed that an oppressor cannot be the Khalifa, a judge, imam for prayer, or even a simple witness. However, if he is already the leader, then we must go through the Majlis-ash-Shura first to remove him.

Ash-Shahastani believed that the Khalifa is very important, so in case of disagreement between him and the people, no individual should go about creating turmoil. Instead, the people should go through the Majlis-ash-Shura.

Al-Ash'ari noted that the first fitnah or dispute after the Prophet's death was the dispute over the Khilafa.

Ibn Taymiya believed that an oppressive Khalifa should not be fought against immediately, but rather after going through the Majlis-ash-Shura first (and failing).

An-Nawawi wrote that a sinning, oppressive Khalifa should be removed by the Majlis-ash-Shura. However, if much bloodshed among the Muslims is forthcoming, then the ummah should avoid the fighting and bear him.

Ghazali believed that a bad Khalifa should be borne to avoid the possible killing of Muslims. However, the Majlis-ash-Shura should warn the Khalifa quietly at first. If the Majlis-ash-Shura is unsuccessful, and fighting is threatened, then the ummah must weigh the possible cost of many deaths against oppression. Sometimes the bloodshed warrants that the oppressive Khalifa should be tolerated.

1.10 The removal of the Khalifa

The Majlis-ash-Shura is the body which has the authority to remove the Khalifa if he behaves contrary to Islam. At first, the Majlis-ash-Shura must advise the Khalifa of his deviant behavior, and warn him to stop. If the Khalifa does not change, then he must be told to resign. If he refuses and threatens to use physical force to stay on (e.g., a corrupt army backs him), then the Muslim ummah has three options available to it at that point:

Fight him according to some scholars.

Be patient, and let him lead, to avoid Muslim bloodshed. This is the strongest opinion: the majority of the ahl-ul-hadith and scholars of the Sunnah advocate this view including Malik, Ash-Shafi'i, and Ahmad.

Depending on the circumstance, either fight or be patient according to some scholars.

When should the ummah have to fight? Muslim scholars all agree that fighting is obligatory on the ummah when the Khalifa starts to alter Islamic doctrine and practice. This makes him a clear kafir. Some scholars say that the Khalifa can be fought even when he becomes only a fasiq - e.g., he believes in prayer, but does not do it regularly. The majority of scholars say that this particular offense (neglecting prayer) is kufr anyway - not just fisq.

The Khilafa of Abu Bakr

The method by which Abu Bakr became Khalifa was by selection (ikhtiar) though there is a difference of opinion on whether the selection was carried out by a Majlis-ash-Shura or the general populace. There are certain actions of the Prophet which implied that he wanted Abu Bakr to be the first Khalifa.

A woman asked the Prophet who to come back to for help should the Prophet not be there (i.e. if the Prophet had died). The Prophet stated Abu Bakr.

The Prophet said, "Follow the best successors after me: Abu Bakr and Umar."

When the Prophet became ill, Aisha said that he asked her to call in Abu Bakr to write a letter "so that people will not dispute."

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr to lead the prayer in his absence.

The Prophet informed us of a dream he had in which he pulled some water out of a well, followed by Abu Bakr, then by Umar.

During a khutba, the Prophet said, "If I were to choose a best friend from the people, I would choose Abu Bakr."

A man had a dream where the Prophet and Abu Bakr where weighed against each other, and the Prophet was found to be heavier. Then Abu Bakr and Umar were weighed - Abu Bakr being heavier. Then Umar and Uthman were weighed - Umar being heavier.

2.0 The Rightly Guided Caliphs

2.1 Meaning of the Word 'Caliph'

The word 'Caliph' is the English form of the Arabic word 'Khalifa,' which is short for Khalifatu Rasulil-lah. The latter expression means Successor to the Messenger of God, the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him). The title 'Khalifatu Rasulil-lah'. was first used for Abu Bakr, who was elected head of the Muslim community after the death of the Prophet.

2.3 The Significance of the Caliphate

The mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), like that of the earlier messengers of God, was to call people to the worship of and submission to the One True God. In practice, submission to God means to obey His injunctions as given in the Holy Qur'an and as exemplified by Sunnah (the practice of the Prophet). As successor to the Prophet, the Caliph was the head of the Muslim community and his primary responsibility was to continue in the path of the Prophet. Since religion was perfected and the door of Divine revelation was closed at the death of the Prophet, the Caliph was to make all laws in accordance with the Qur'an and the Sunnah. He was a ruler over Muslims but not their sovereign since sovereignty belongs to God alone. He was to be obeyed as long as he obeyed God. He was responsible for creating and maintaining conditions under which it would be easy for Muslims to live according to Islamic principles, and to see that justice was done to all. Abu Bakr, at the time he accepted the caliphate, stated his position thus:

"The weak among you shall be strong with me until their rights have been vindicated; and the strong among you shall he weak with me until, if the Lord wills, I have taken what is due from them... Obey me as long as I obey God and His Messenger. When I disobey Him and His Prophet, then obey me not."

2.4 The Rightly-Guided Caliphs (Al-Khulafa-ur-Rashidun)

Those Caliphs who truly followed in the Prophet's foot steps are called 'The Rightly-Guided Caliphs' (Al-Khulafa-ur Rashidun in Arabic). They are the first four Caliphs: Abu Bakr, 'Umar, Uthman and Ali. All four were among thc earliest and closest Companions of the Prophet (peace be on him). They lived simple and righteous lives and strove hard for the religion of God. Their justice was impartial, their treatment of others was kind and merciful, and they were one with the people - the first among equals. After these four, the later Caliphs assumed the manners of kings and emperors and the true spirit of equality of ruler and ruled diminished to a considerable extent in the political life of Muslims.

It should be clearly understood that the mission of Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him), and hence that of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, was not political, social or economic reform, although such reforms were a logical consequence of the success of this mission, nor the unity of a nation and the establishment of an empire, although the nation did unite and vast areas came under one administration, nor the spread of a civilization or culture, although many civilizations and cultures developed, but only to deliver the message of God to all the peoples of the world and to invite them to submit to Him, while being the foremost among those who submitted.

What About the Present?

The primary responsibility of an Islamic government is still the same as it was in the days of the early Caliphs: to make all laws in accordance with the Qur'an and the Sunnah, to make positive efforts to create and maintain conditions under which it will be possible and easy for Muslims to live an Islamic life, to secure impartial and speedy justice for all, and to strive hard in the path of God. Any government which is committed to such a policy is truly following the message delivered by the Prophet (peace be on him).

2.4.1 The First Caliph, Abu Bakr (632-634 A.C.)

"If I were to take a friend other than my Lord, I would take Abu Bakr as a friend." (Hadith)

Election to the Caliphate

The Prophet's closest Companion, Abu Bakr, was not present when the Holy Prophet (peace be on him) breathed his last in the apartment of his beloved wife of later years, Aisha, Abu Bakr's daughter. When he came to know of the Prophet's passing, Abu Bakr hurried to the house of sorrow.

"How blessed was your life and how beatific is your death," he whispered as he kissed the cheek of his beloved friend and master who now was no more.

When Abu Bakr came out of the Prophet's apartment and broke the news, disbelief and dismay gripped the community of Muslims in Medina. Muhammad (peace be on him) had been the leader, the guide and the bearer of Divine revelation through whom they had been brought from idolatry and barbarism into the way of God. How could he die? Even Umar, one of the bravest and strongest of the Prophet's Companions, lost his composure and drew his sword and threatened to kill anyone who said that the Prophet was dead. Abu Bakr gently pushed him aside, ascended the steps of the lectern in the mosque and addressed the people, saying

"O people, verily whoever worshipped Muhammad, behold! Muhammad is indeed dead. But whoever worships God, behold! God is alive and will never die."

And then he concluded with a verse from the Qur'an:

"And Muhammad is but a Messenger. Many Messengers have gone before him; if then he dies or is killed, will you turn back upon your heels?" [3:144]

On hearing these words, the people were consoled. Despondency gave place to confidence and tranquility. This critical moment had passed. But the Muslim community was now faced with an extremely serious problem: that of choosing a leader. After some discussion among the Companions of the Prophet who had assembled in order to select a leader, it became apparent that no one was better suited for this responsibility than Abu Bakr. A portion of the speech the First Caliph gave after his election has already been quoted in the introduction.

Abu Bakr's Life

Abu Bakr ('The Owner of Camels') was not his real name. He acquired this name later in life because of his great interest in raising camels. His real name was Abdul Ka'aba ('Slave of Ka'aba'), which Muhammad (peace be on him) later changed to Abdullah ('Slave of God'). The Prophet also gave him the title of 'Siddiq' - 'The Testifier to the Truth.'

Abu Bakr was a fairly wealthy merchant, and before he embraced Islam, was a respected citizen of Mecca. He was three years younger than Muhammad (peace be on him) and some natural affinity drew them together from earliest child hood. He remained the closest Companion of the Prophet all through the Prophet's life. When Muhammad first invited his closest friends and relatives to Islam, Abu Bakr was among the earliest to accept it. He also persuaded Uthman and Bilal to accept Islam. In the early days of the Prophet's mission, when the handful of Muslims were subjected to relentless persecution and torture, Abu Bakr bore his full share of hardship. Finally when God's permission came to emigrate from Mecca, he was the one chosen by the Prophet to accompany him on the dangerous journey to Medina. In the numerous battles which took place during the life of the Prophet, Abu Bakr was always by his side. Once, he brought all his belongings to the Prophet, who was raising money for the defense of Medina. The Prophet asked "Abu Bakr, what did you leave for your family?" The reply came: "God and His Prophet."

Even before Islam, Abu Bakr was known to be a man of upright character and amiable and compassionate nature. All through his life he was sensitive to human suffering and kind to the poor and helpless. Even though he was wealthy, he lived very simply and spent his money for charity, for freeing slaves and for the cause of Islam. He often spent part of the night in supplication and prayer. He shared with his family a cheerful and affectionate home life.

Abu-Bakr's Caliphate

Such, then, was the man upon whom the burden of leadership fell at the most sensitive period in the history of the Muslims.

As the news of the Prophet's death spread, a number of tribes rebelled and refused to pay Zakat (poor-due), saying that this was due only to the Prophet (peace be on him). At the same time a number of impostors claimed that the prophethood had passed to them after Muhammad and they raised the standard of revolt. To add to all this, two powerful empires, the Eastern Roman and the Persian, also threatened the new-born Islamic state at Medina.

Under these circumstances, many Companions of the Prophet, including Umar, advised Abu Bakr to make concessions to the Zakat evaders, at least for a time. The new Caliph disagreed. He insisted that the Divine Law cannot be divided, that there is no distinction between the obligations of Zakat and Salat (prayer), and that any compromise with the injunctions of God would eventually erode the foundations of Islam. Umar and others were quick to realize their error of judgment. The revolting tribes attacked Medina but the Muslims were prepared. Abu Bakr himself led the charge, forcing them to retreat. He then made a relentless war on the false claimants to prophethood, most of whom submitted and again professed lslam.

The threat from the Roman Empire had actually arisen earlier, during the Prophet's lifetime. The Prophet had organized an army under the command of Usama, the son of a freed slave. The army had not gone far when the Prophet had fallen ill so they stopped. After the death of the Prophet the question was raised whether the army should be sent again or should remain for the defence of Medina. Again Abu Bakr showed a firm determination. He said, "I shall send Usama's army on its way as ordered by the Prophet, even if I am left alone."

The final instructions he gave to Usama prescribed a code of conduct in war which remains unsurpassed to this day. Part of his instructions to the Muslim army were:

"Do not be deserters, nor be guilty of disobedience. Do not kill an old man, a woman or a child. Do not injure date palms and do not cut down fruit trees. Do not slaughter any sheep or cows or camels except for food. You will encounter persons who spend their lives in monasteries. Leave them alone and do not molest them."

Khalid bin Waleed had been chosen by the Prophet (peace be on him) on several occasions to lead Muslim armies. A man of supreme courage and a born leader, his military genius came to full flower during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr. Throughout Abu Bakr's reign Khalid led his troops from one victory to another against the attacking Romans.

Another contribution of Abu Bakr to the cause of Islam was the collection and compilation of the verses of the Qur'an.

Abu Bakr died on 21 Jamadi-al Akhir, 13 A.H. (23 August 634 A.C.), at the age of sixty-three, and was buried by the side of the Holy Prophet (peace be on him). His caliphate had been of a mere twenty-seven months duration. In this brief span, however, Abu Bakr had managed, by the Grace of God, to strengthen and consolidate his community and the state, and to secure the Muslims against the perils which had threatened their existence.

2.4.2 The Second Caliph, Umar (634-644 A.C.)

"God has placed truth upon Umar's tongue and heart. (Hadith)"

'Umar's Life

During his last illness Abu Bakr had conferred with his people, particularly the more eminent among them. After this meeting they chose 'Umar as his successor. 'Umar was born into a respected Quraish family thirteen years after the birth of Muhammad (peace be on him). Umar's family was known for its extensive knowledge of genealogy. When he grew up, 'Umar was proficient in this branch of knowledge as well as in swordsmanship, wrestling and the art of speaking. He also learned to read and write while still a child, a very rare thing in Mecca at that time. 'Umar earned his living as a merchant. His trade took him to many foreign lands and he met all kinds of people. This experience gave him an insight into the affairs and problems of men. 'Umar's personality was dynamic, self-assertive, frank and straight forward. He always spoke whatever was in his mind even if it displeased others.

'Umar was twenty-seven when the Prophet (peace be on him) proclaimed his mission. The ideas Muhammad was preaching enraged him as much as they did the other notables of Mecca. He was just as bitter against anyone accepting Islam as others among the Quraish. When his slave-girl accepted Islam he beat her until he himself was exhausted and told her, "I have stopped because I am tired, not out of pity for you." The story of his embracing Islam is an interesting one. One day, full of anger against the Prophet, he drew his sword and set out to kill him. A friend met him on the way. When 'Umar told him what he planned to do, his friend informed him that 'Umar's own sister, Fatima, and her husband had also accepted Islam. 'Umar went straight to his sister's house where he found her reading from pages of the Qur'an. He fell upon her and beat her mercilessly. Bruised and bleeding, she told her brother, "Umar, you can do what you like, but you cannot turn our hearts away from Islam." These words produced a strange effect upon 'Umar. What was this faith that made even weak women so strong of heart? He asked his sister to show him what she had been reading; he was at once moved to the core by the words of the Qur'an and immediately grasped their truth. He went straight to the house where the Prophet was staying and vowed allegiance to him.

Umar made no secret of his acceptance of Islam. He gathered the Muslims and offered prayers at the Ka'aba. This boldness and devotion of an influential citizen of Mecca raised the morale of the small community of Muslims. Nonetheless 'Umar was also subjected to privations, and when permission for emigration to Medina came, he also left Mecca. The soundness of 'Umar's judgment, his devotion to the Prophet (peace be on him), his outspokenness and uprightness won for him a trust and confidence from the Prophet which was second only to that given to Abu Bakr. The Prophet gave him the title 'Farooq' which means the 'Separator of Truth from False hood.' During the Caliphate of Abu Bakr, 'Umar was his closest assistant and adviser. When Abu Bakr died, all the people of Medina swore allegiance to 'Umar, and on 23 Jamadi-al-Akhir, 13 A.H., he was proclaimed Caliph.

'Umar's Caliphate

After taking charge of his office, 'Umar spoke to the Muslims of Medina :

"...O people, you have some rights on me which you can always claim. One of your rights is that if anyone of you comes to me with a claim, he should leave satisfied. Another of your rights is that you can demand that I take nothing unjustly from the revenues of the State. You can also demand that... I fortify your frontiers and do not put you into danger. It is also your right that if you go to battle I should look after your families as a father would while you are away. "O people, remain conscious of God, forgive me my faults and help me in my task. Assist me in enforcing what is good and forbidding what is evil. Advise me regarding the obligations that have been imposed upon me by God..."

The most notable feature of 'Umar's caliphate was the vast expansion of Islam. Apart from Arabia, Egypt, Iraq, Palestine and Iran also came under the protection of the Islamic government. But the greatness of 'Umar himself lies in the quality of his rule. He gave a practical meaning to the Qur'anic injunction:

"O you who believe, stand out firmly for justice as witnesses to God, even as against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, and whether it concerns rich or poor, for God can best protect both." [4:135]

Once a woman brought a claim against the Caliph 'Umar. When 'Umar appeared on trial before the judge, the judge stood up as a sign of respect toward him. 'Umar reprimanded him, saying, "This is the first act of injustice you did to this woman!"

He insisted that his appointed governors live simple lives, keep no guard at their doors and be accessible to the people at all times, and he himself set the example for them. Many times foreign envoys and messengers sent to him by his generals found him resting under a palm tree or praying in the mosque among the people, and it was difficult for them to distinguish which man was the Caliph. He spent many a watchful night going about the streets of Medina to see whether anyone needed help or assistance. The general social and moral tone of the Muslim society at that time is well-illustrated by the words of an Egyptian who was sent to spy on the Muslims during their Egyptian campaign. He reported:

"I have seen a people, every one of whom loves death more than he loves life. They cultivate humility rather than pride. None is given to material ambitions. Their mode of living is simple... Their commander is their equal. They make no distinction between superior and inferior, between master and slave. When the time of prayer approaches, none remains behind..."

'Umar gave his government an administrative structure. Departments of treasury, army and public revenues were established. Regular salaries were set up for soldiers. A popuation census was held. Elaborate land surveys were conducted to assess equitable taxes. New cities were founded. The areas which came under his rule were divided into provinces and governors were appointed. New roads were laid, canals were lug and wayside hotels were built. Provision was made for he support of the poor and the needy from public funds. He defined, by precept and by example, the rights and privileges of non-Muslims, an example of which is the following contract with the Christians of Jerusalem :

"This is the protection which the servant of God, 'Umar, the Ruler of the Believers has granted to the people of Eiliya [Jerusalem]. The protection is for their lives and properties, their churches and crosses, their sick and healthy and for all their coreligionists. Their churches shall not be used for habitation, nor shall they be demolished, nor shall any injury be done to them or to their compounds, or to their crosses, nor shall their properties be injured in any way. There shall be no compulsion for these people in the matter of religion, nor shall any of them suffer any injury on account of religion... Whatever is written herein is under the covenant of God and the responsibility of His Messenger, of the Caliphs and of the believers, and shall hold good as long as they pay Jizya [the tax for their defense] imposed on them."

Those non-Muslims who took part in defense together with the Muslims were exempted from paying Jizya, and when the Muslims had to retreat from a city whose non-Muslim citizens had paid this tax for their defense, the tax was returned to the non-Muslims. The old, the poor and the disabled of Muslims and non-Muslims alike were provided for from the public treasury and from the Zakat funds.

'Umar's Death

In 23 A.H., when Umar returned to Medina from Hajj;, he raised his hands and prayed,

"O God! I am advanced in years, my bones are weary, my powers are declining, and the people for whom I am responsible have spread far and wide. Summon me back to Thyself, my lord!" Some time later, when 'Umar went to the mosque to lead a prayer, a Magian named Abu Lulu Feroze, who had a grudge against 'Umar on a personal matter, attacked him with a dagger and stabbed him several times. Umar reeled and fell to the ground. When he learned that the assassin was a Magian, he sid, "Thank God he is not a Muslim."

'Umar died in the first week of Muharram, 24 A.H., and was buried by the side of the Holy Prophet (peace be on him).

2.4.3 The Third Caliph, Uthman (644-656 A.C.)

"Every Prophet has an assistant, and my assistant will be Uthman."(Hadith)

Uthman's Election

When 'Umar fell under the assassin's dagger, before he died the people asked him to nominate his successor. 'Umar appointed a committee consisting of six of the ten companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) about whom the Prophet had said, "They are the people of Heaven" - Ali, Uthman, Abdul Rahman, Sa'ad, Al-Zubayr and Talha - to select the next Caliph from among themselves. He also outlined the procedure to be followed if any differences of opinion should arise. Abdul Rahman withdrew his name. He was then authorized by the committee to nominate the Caliph. After two days of discussion among the candidates and after the opinions of the Muslims in Medina had been ascertained, the choice was finally limited to Uthman and Ali. Abdul Rahman came to the mosque together with other Muslims, and after a brief speech and questioning of the two men, swore allegiance to Uthman. All those present did the same, and Uthman became the third Caliph of Islam in the month of Muharram, 24 A.H.

Uthman's Life

Uthman bin Affan was born seven years after the Holy Prophet (peace be on him). He belonged to the Omayyad branch of the Quraish tribe. He learned to read and write at an early age, and as a young man became a successful merchant. Even before Islam Uthman had been noted for his truthfulness and integrity. He and Abu Bakr were close friends, and it was Abu Bakr who brought him to Islam when he was thirty-four years of age. Some years later he married the Prophet's second daughter, Ruqayya. In spite of his wealth and position, his relatives subjected him to torture because he had embraced Islam, and he was forced to emigrate to Abyssinia. Some time later he returned to Mecca but soon migrated to Medina with the other Muslims. In Medina his business again began to flourish and he regained his former prosperity. Uthman's generosity had no limits. On various occasions he spent a great portion of his wealth for the welfare of the Muslims, for charity and for equipping the Muslim armies. That is why he came to be known as 'Ghani' meaning 'Generous.'

Uthman's wife, Ruqayya was seriously ill just before the Battle of Badr and he was excused by the Prophet (peace be on him) from participating in the battle. The illness Ruqayya proved fatal, leaving Uthman deeply grieved. The Prophet was moved and offered Uthman the hand of another of his daughters, Kulthum. Because he had the high privilege of having two daughters of the Prophet as wives Uthman was known as 'The Possessor of the Two Lights. '

Uthman participated in the Battles of Uhud and the Trench. After the encounter of the Trench, the Prophet (peace be on him) determined to perform Hajj and sent Uthman as his emissary to the Quraish in Mecca, who detained him. The episode ended in a treaty with the Meccans known as the Treaty of Hudaibiya.

The portrait we have of Uthman is of an unassuming, honest, mild, generous and very kindly man, noted especially for his modesty and his piety. He often spent part of the night in prayer, fasted every second or third day, performed hajj every year, and looked after the needy of the whole community. In spite of his wealth, he lived very simply and slept on bare sand in the courtyard of the Prophet's mosque. Uthman knew the Qur'an from memory and had an intimate knowledge of the context and circumstances relating to each verse.

Uthman's Caliphate

During Uthman's rule the characteristics of Abu Bakr's and Umar's caliphates - impartial justice for all, mild and humane policies, striving in the path of God, and the expansion of Islam - continued. Uthman's realm extended in the west to Morocco, in the east to Afghanistan, and in the north to Armenia and Azerbaijan. During his caliphate a navy was organized, administrative divisions of the state were revised, and many public projects were expanded and completed. Uthman sent prominent Companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) as his personal deputies to various provinces to scrutinize the conduct of officials and the condition of the people.

Uthman's most notable contribution to the religion of God was the compilation of a complete and authoritative text of the Qur'an. A large number of copies of this text were made and distributed all over the Muslim world.

Uthman ruled for twelve years. The first six years were marked by internal peace and tranquility, but during the second half of his caliphate a rebellion arose. The Jews and the Magians, taking advantage of dissatisfaction among the people, began conspiring against Uthman, and by publicly airing their complaints and grievances, gained so much sympathy that it became difficult to distinguish friend from foe.

It may seem surprising that a ruler of such vast territories, whose armies were matchless, was unable to deal with these rebels. If Uthman had wished, the rebellion could have been crushed at the very moment it began. But he was reluctant to be the first to shed the blood of Muslims, however rebellious they might be. He preferred to reason with them, to persuade them with kindness and generosity. He well remembered hearing the Prophet (peace be on him) say, "Once the sword is unsheathed among my followers, it will not be sheathed until the Last Day."

The rebels demanded that he abdicate and some of the Companions advised him to do so. He would gladly have followed this course of action, but again he was bound by a solemn pledge he had given to the Prophet. "Perhaps God will clothe you with a shirt, Uthman" the Prophet had told him once, "and if the people want you to take it off, do not take it off for them." Uthman said to a well-wisher on a day when his house was surrounded by the rebels, "God's Messenger made a covenant with me and I shall show endurance in adhering to it."

After a long siege, the rebels broke into Uthman's house and murdered him. When the first assassin's sword struck Uthman, he was reciting the verse,

"Verily, God sufficeth thee; He is the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing" [2:137]

Uthman breathed his last on the afternoon of Friday, 17 Dhul Hijja, 35 A.H. (June. (656 A.C.). He was eighty-four years old. The power of tHe rebels was so great that Uthman's body lay unburied until Saturday night when he was buried in his blood-stained clothes, the shroud which befits all martyrs in the cause of God.

2.4.4 The Fourth Caliph, Ali (656-661 A.C.)

"You [Ali] are my brother in this world and the next." (Hadith)

Ali's Election

After Uthman's martyrdom, the office of the caliphate remained unfilled for two or three days. Many people insisted that Ali should take up the office, but he was embarrassed by the fact that the people who pressed him hardest were the rebels, and he therefore declined at first. When the notable Companions of the Prophet (peace be on him) urged him, however, he finally agreed.

Ali's Life

Ali bin Abi Talib was the first cousin of the Prophet (peace be on him). More than that, he had grown up in the Prophet's own household, later married his youngest daughter, Fatima, and remained in closest association with him for nearly thirty years.

Ali was ten years old when the Divine Message came to Muhammad (peace be on him). One night he saw the Prophet and his wife Khadijah bowing and prostrating. He asked the Prophet about the meaning of their actions. The Prophet told him that they were praying to God Most High and that Ali too should accept Islam. Ali said that he would first like to ask his father about it. He spent a sleepless night, and in the morning he went to the Prophet and said, "When God created me He did not consult my father, so why should I consult my father in order to serve God?" and he accepted the truth of Muhammad's message.

When the Divine command came, "And warn thy nearest relatives" [26:214], Muhammad (peace be on him) invited his relatives for a meal. After it was finished, he addressed them and asked, "Who will join me in the cause of God?" There was utter silence for a while, and then Ali stood up. "I am the youngest of all present here," he said, "My eyes trouble me because they are sore and my legs are thin and weak, but I shall join you and help you in whatever way I can." The assembly broke up in derisive laughter. But during the difficult wars in Mecca, Ali stood by these words and faced all the hardships to which the Muslims were subjected. He slept in the bed of the Prophet when the Quraish planned to murder Muhammad. It was he to whom the Prophet entrusted, when he left Mecca, the valuables which had been given to him for safekeeping, to be returned to their owners.

Apart from the expedition of Tabuk, Ali fought in all the early battles of Islam with great distinction, particularly in the expedition of Khaybar. It is said that in the Battle of Uhud he received more than sixteen wounds.

The Prophet (peace be on him) loved Ali dearly and called him by many fond names. Once the Prophet found him sleeping in the dust. He brushed off Ali's clothes and said fondly, "Wake up, Abu Turab (Father of Dust)." The Prophet also gave him the title of 'Asadullah' ('Lion of God').

Ali's humility, austerity, piety, deep knowledge of the Qur'an and his sagacity gave him great distinction among the Prophet's Companions. Abu Bakr, 'Umar and Uthman consulted him frequently during their caliphates. Many times 'Umar had made him his vice-regent at Medina when he was away. Ali was also a great scholar of Arabic literature and pioneered in the field of grammar and rhetoric. His speeches, sermons and letters served for generations afterward as models of literary expression. Many of his wise and epigrammatic sayings have been preserved. Ali thus had a rich and versatile personality. In spite of these attainments he remained a modest and humble man. Once during his caliphate when he was going about the marketplace, a man stood up in respect and followed him. "Do not do it," said Ali. "Such manners are a temptation for a ruler and a disgrace for the ruled."

Ali and his household lived extremely simple and austere lives. Sometimes they even went hungry themselves because of Ali's great generosity, and none who asked for help was ever turned away from his door. His plain, austere style of living did not change even when he was ruler over a vast domain.

Ali's Caliphate

As mentioned previously, Ali accepted the caliphate very reluctantly. Uthman's murder and the events surrounding it were a symptom, and also became a cause, of civil strife on a large scale. Ali felt that the tragic situation was mainly due to inept governors. He therefore dismissed all the governors who had been appointed by Uthman and appointed new ones. All the governors excepting Muawiya, the governor of Syria, submitted to his orders. Muawiya declined to obey until Uthman's blood was avenged. The Prophet's widow Aisha also took the position that Ali should first bring the murderers to trial. Due to the chaotic conditions during the last days of Uthman it was very difficult to establish the identity of the murderers, and Ali refused to punish anyone whose guilt was not lawfully proved. Thus a battle between the army of Ali and the supporters of Aisha took place. Aisha later realized her error of judgment and never forgave herself for it.

The situation in Hijaz (thc part of Arabia in which Mecca and Medina are located) became so troubled that Ali moved his capital to Iraq. Muawiya now openly rebelled against Ali and a fierce battle was fought between their armies. This battle was inconclusive, and Ali had to accept the de facto government of Muawiya in Syria.

However, even though the era of Ali's caliphate was marred by civil strife, he nevertheless introduced a number of reforms, particularly in the levying and collecting of revenues.

It was the fortieth year of Hijra. A fanatical group called Kharijites, consisting of people who had broken away from Ali due to his compromise with Muawiya, claimed that neither Ali, the Caliph, nor Muawiya, the ruler of Syria, nor Amr bin al-Aas, the ruler of Egypt, were worthy of rule. In fact, they went so far as to say that the true caliphate came to an end with 'Umar and that Muslims should live without any ruler over them except God. They vowed to kill all three rulers, and assassins were dispatched in three directions.

The assassins who were deputed to kill Muawiya and Amr did not succeed and were captured and executed, but Ibn-e-Muljim, the assassin who was commissioned to kill Ali, accomplished his task. One morning when Ali was absorbed in prayer in a mosque, Ibn-e-Muljim stabbed him with a poisoned sword. On the 20th of Ramadan, 40 A.H., died the last of the Rightly Guided Caliphs of Islam. May God Most High be pleased with them and grant to them His eternal reward.

3. 0 Islamic Government

"The establishment of justice for all citizens of the state, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, is one of the major purposes of the Islamic system of government. Corruption, bribery, abuse of authority, the creation of social conflict for personal or group benefit, torture, exploitation and oppression, are all evils against which the Islamic system must struggle."

By Bilal Cleland

From the first Islamic state in Medina, a city in Arabia, until just after World War One, there was a Caliph, the leader of the Muslims, and an Islamic government somewhere in the world. In 1923 of the Common Era (CE), with the end of the caliphate, Islamic government ceased. In Muslim majority countries, all of which were at that time under the influence or direct control of European governments, the legal and political systems introduced were modelled on those of the Christian states of the west. Various countries copied or had imposed upon them, the systems of Europe. The British political and legal system was introduced to some areas, others copied the French, some the Swiss. In nearly every country the institutions based upon the Quran, the Holy Book of Islam, were abolished. Now in the last part of the twentieth century, the demand for the Islamic system of government is reviving. After years of neglect it is once again becoming a question for serious study.

The system of government under Islam is based upon the Quran and the Sunna or Traditions of the Prophet Muhammad. As Islamic government has to suit many different times and situations, the basic rules and principles are set out in the Quran but the details are for the Muslims of a particular time or place to decide. There has always been a lot of discussion amongst Muslim scholars about the best way to implement these rules and principles.

The sovereignty of God, the message conveyed by all the prophets, is the foundation of the system. Legislation contained in the Quran becomes the basic law of the state. This puts the fundamental law of the society beyond the lobbying power of particular interest groups and ensures that legislation is just and equitable. The government must make decisions on the basis of what God has revealed. If it does not, according to the Quran, it is not Islamic, for those who make decisions on other than what God has revealed are unbelievers (Surah 5 Verse 44). In cases not covered by revelation, decisions based on Islamic principles are left to the Mujtahids, Islamic experts on legal interpretation. The Muslims can make laws or regulations dealing with such matters, but these do not have the same permanence as Quranic injunctions.

God said in the Quran that He was going to create a 'caliph' or representative upon the earth (2:30). Human beings are these caliphs. This means that all humanity is responsible for the establishment of the laws and principles revealed by God, not some superior class of priests or holy men. Thus Islamic government is not a theocracy. All human beings are equal, the only distinction made by God is in their degree of righteousness. Islam allows no distinction amongst people on the basis of tribe or race, ethnic group or amount of wealth. The Muslims are different from other people only in that they are conscious of the importance of submission to God's decrees.

The establishment of justice for all citizens of the state, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, is one of the major purposes of the Islamic system of government. That is why the apostles were sent among us over the centuries. It says in the Quran "We sent before Our apostles, with clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that humanity may stand forth in justice" (57:25) Corruption, bribery, abuse of authority, the creation of social conflict for personal or group benefit, torture, exploitation and oppression, are all evils against which the Islamic system must struggle. It is the duty of every individual Muslim and of the Islamic government to strive for justice and to prevent and oppose evil. If injustice spreads in a community with none to denounce it, then that whole community and its government is considered to be transgressing the law of God. Where injustice is rife there cannot be peace. The Quran warns that nations in the past have been destroyed for such neglect.

Consultation has a high status in Islam. This is indicated by the name of surah or chapter forty-two, "Consultation". It is in this surah that those people who conduct their affairs by mutual consultation are linked to those who establish regular prayer and those who spend on helping others (42:38). The extent of the consultation to be carried out is not defined in detail. Some scholars argue that only those knowledgeable about Islam need be consulted. Others argue that this is an endorsement of mass consultation through general elections. The principle of consultation is however, quite clearly essential and how it is implemented will be related to the temper of the time or the location. Although non-Muslims were not involved in consultation in the early period of the birth of Islam, there is nothing to indicate they cannot be included in consultation on national affairs or affairs not dealing with the beliefs of the Muslims. However as the head of state must implement the Quran and Sunna, it is necessary that this position should be held by a Muslim.

Islamic government is a system of government which follows the laws and principles of the Quran and the Sunna of Muhammad. Government is the responsibility of all humanity, especially of those people who understand that they are the 'caliphs' of God, not the privilege of a ruling class of theocrats. Islamic government enforces the law of equality and it establishes the rule of justice. It is always based upon consultation. Muslims believe that only when this system is established can there be justice and harmony in society.

4.0 The Aim of Politics in Islam

(http://ireland.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Hamdan/hamdan27.htm)

According to Al-Mawardi from his book Al-Ahkam Al-Sultaniyyah, it is hirasatud din wa siasatud dunya - to uphold the religion and administer the world. Politics is not munkar - is not a depravity - real politics is noble virtuous because it administers the affairs of all creatures, bringing man closer to good and away from fasad - evil. According to Ibn al-Qayyim, politics is really the justice of Allah the Almighty and His Prophet (peace and the blessings of Allah be upon him).

The Prophet Muhammad s.a.w. was a politician as well as the messenger conveying the risalah, murabbi - teacher, Qadi - Chief Justice, Head of the nation and Imam of the ummah. The Khulafa' al Rasyidun - the rightly guided leaders who succeeded him were also politicians following the Sunnah - way of the Prophet, establishing just administration, practising ihsan - the betterment of good and providing the leadership of 'ilm - knowledge and Iman - belief.

However in the present time, due to 'politics' man faced suffering as a result of deceit and political ploys and scheming and devious politicians, whether in the form of past colonialists, treacherous rulers, tyrannical leaders and regimes preaching Machiavellian philosophy (the ends justifies the means!).

It became common to label and describe committed Muslims as 'political' so that they are regarded warily and wickedly for the purpose of disassociating and furthering apart the people from them, intending that society will shun and hate what is called 'political Islam'. It has been such that symbols of Islam like the headscarf, the proper attire and congregational prayers - Salat jama'ah are attempted to be labelled 'political'.

It is a blatant lie for those who say that there is no religion in politics and that there is no politics in religion. This deceit was once tried in the form of an attempted fatwa - a decree while the members of the Ikhwan al-Muslimun were imprisoned in the detention camps in Egypt in the 50's. The regime wanted to influence the masses to regard the activists and the Dai' (the very people who wanted to uphold the Syari'ah, Al-Qur'an and Al-Sunnah) as the purveyors of fasad - evil by using corrupted 'ulama - paid scholars.

1. The Fight against Fasad and Zulm (Evil, Transgression and Tyranny) is the utmost in Jihad

From the understanding of the Prophet's tradition (mafhum hadith):

Munkar (transgression) is not limited to khamr - liqour, gambling and zina - unlawful sex but degrading and defiling the honour and dignity of the people and citizens is a major transgression, so is cheating in the elections, refusing to give testimony - neglecting to vote, letting government be in the hands of those who are not deserving and undesired, stealing and squandering the nation's wealth and property, monopolising the people's needs for personal gains or cronies' interests, detaining people without crime or just cause, without judgement from a fair court, torturing human beings in prison and the detention camps, giving, accepting and mediating in bribes, cowering up to, praising evil rulers, allowing the enemies of Allah and the enemies of the Muslim community to be leaders and shunning the believers - the mu'min.

These are all grave transgressions!

When a Muslim remains quiet upon seeing all of these it means that he or she does not deserve to live (is not alive) from the mafhum of al-ayat and al-hadith.

Islam requires that every Muslim has political responsibility. A Muslim is required by his Iman - faith to be truly concerned with the affairs and problems of the ummah - community, helping and defending the meek and the weak, fighting tyranny and oppression. By retreating and abstaining oneself, it will only invite divine retribution and being seized by the flames of hell (mafhum ayat).

2. Political Freedom is Our Utmost Need Today

Islam is always rejuvenated, its message spread across, its resurgence, its reverberating call heard by all even if it is given some limited freedom. Therefore the first battle is to obtain freedom to deliver the message of da'wah, the risalah of tawhid (Unity of God), spread consciousness and enabling the existence of Islamic movements.

True democracy is not the whims and desires of the tyrannical rulers or their cronies, it is not the place to jail and incarcerate its fighters and not the place to torture its proponents.

Democracy is the simplest and proper way to achieve the aims of a noble life, to be able to invite all to Allah and Islam, to be able to call others to Iman without having our souls being imprisoned and our bodies sentenced to be executed by hanging. It is the space for a free and honourable nation to have the right to choose, evaluate the ruler, change governments without coups and without bloodshed.

The theory, way and system which looks alien maybe adopted if it benefits us and as long as it does not contradict clear Islamic edicts and the rules of Syariah. We appraise, amend according to our spirit, we do not adopt its philosophy, and we do not allow what is forbidden and vice versa. We do not relinquish or compromise what is ordained or compulsory - the wajib in Islam.

The gist of democracy is that the public, the people can choose the rulers who are going to administer them; the people having the right to select, criticise and terminate; and the people are not forced to accept systems, trends, and policies which they do not agree to and they are not abused. They are free to hold elections, referendums, ensuring majority rights, protecting minority rights, having opposition, have multi parties, have press freedom and safeguarding the independence of the judiciary. But once again to constantly uphold and safeguard the principles of Islam, the firm rulings, the al-thawabit: the determined laws - hukm qat'i, the daruri - the essentials of religion and the non-ijtihadiy must not be compromised or neglected.

Syura:

Syura or consultative decision making must be followed and not just as a debating factor. By practising syura, it is closer, hence even better than the spirit of democracy. It is but the lost jewel found, the lost wisdom - al-hikmah which has been rediscovered.

Syura enables musyawarah to be conducted, obtains views and opinions, becomes the responsibility of the people to advise and counsel the government (ad-dinu nasiha) and establish amar ma'ruf nahy munkar - enjoining good and forbidding evil. Among the obligations of amar ma'ruf nahy munkar is the highest jihad (struggle) that is to voice out the truth in front of the unjust tyrant.

The State of Politics in the Ummah :

The musibah or calamity of the ummah then and now is the absence and the abeyying of the system of syura and the adoption of an oppressive dynastical ruling system. In the modern era, dictators stay in power by the force of arms and gold - power and wealth resulting in the syariah being hindered, secularism being forced upon and cultural Westernisation being imposed. Islamic da'wah and the Islamic movement being victimised, brutalised, imprisoned and hounded viciously.

3. Qur'anic Examples of Tyrannical Rulers

The Al-Qur'an denounces all powerful rulers such as Namrud, Fir'aun (Pharaoh), Hamaan and Qarun. Namrud is taghut - the transgressor who enslaves the servants of Allah as his serfs.

There is the pact or collaboration of three parties:

Fir'aun - he claims to be God, carries out tyranny and oppression throughout the land, enslaves the people

Hamaan - the cunning politician, experienced, having self interest, in the service of taghut, propping up and supporting Fir'aun and cheating the people, subjugating them.

Qarun - the capitalist or feudalist who takes opportunity from the unjust and oppressive laws, spending fortunes for the tyrannical leader in order to profit and amass more vast returns, bleeding and exploiting the toils of the people. The origin of Qarun was that he came from Prophet Musa's own clan who colluded with Fir'aun due to the love of worldly life and materialism.

The combination of taghut and Zulm results in the spread of mayhem and the destruction of the community, subjugating man by force and degradation.

The People :

Al Qur'an denounces the people or citizens who are obedient and loyal to their oppressive rulers. The people who remain under the tutelage of taghut are fully responsible and accountable because it is due to their attitude that brought forth these fir'auns and taghuts.

Al-Junud (the collaborators) :

These are the armies and enforcers of the rule and order of the taghut. They use force, fear and repression to eliminate and subdue all opposition and dissidents of the tyrant.

4.0 An Example of Leadership

Balqis, the Queen of Saba' as told in the Qur'an was a woman who lead her people well, just and administered them with intelligence and wisdom saving her people from a war that was destructive and made decisions by syura-consulting them. Alas, the story ended with the acceptance of Islam. She led her people towards the goodness of the world and the hereafter.

Leaders like her are much more capable and qualified with political acumen and wise administration than most of the present Arab and Muslim 'male' leaders. (Prof. Yusuf Qaradawi purposely avoided the term 'al-rijal')

5. Pluralism and Multi Parties in Islam

The existence of various parties or movements is not forbidden as long as unification is not achievable due to differences over objectives, approaches, understanding and the level of confidence and trust. Variety and specialisation are allowed as long as they do not become contradictory and confrontational. However everyone has to be in one united front when facing the challenges to aqidah - belief, syariah, ummah and the survival of Islam. Relations between parties and groupings should be in the atmosphere of non-prejudice, forgiveness, nobleness, counselling truth and steadfastness, wisdom and engaging in healthy cordial debate.

Even when the Islamic State is established there is no reason to feel distraught at the existence of pluralism and differences.

6. Counselling and Corrective Participation in Politics

Without the shedding of blood, the most effective way as the outcome of long and painful struggles is the existence of political forces which the government in power is unable to contain or eliminate: that is presence of political parties. The ruling regime can get rid of individuals and small groups of opponents but it is difficult for them to defeat or wipe out larger organisations which are well structured, organised and rooted in the masses of society. Political parties have the platform, machinery, newspapers and publications as well as mass influence.

Political parties or political movements are necessary to fight oppression, to enable criticism, bringing back the government to to uphold truth and justice, bringing down or changing the government. These parties are capable of monitoring and appraising the government, offer advice and criticism.

7. Voting

Voting in the elections is a form of testimony. A just testimony is considered as long as one is not convicted of crime. Whoever so votes or abstains from voting in the general elections causing the defeat of a trustworthy and deserving candidate but on the other hand allows the candidate who is less trustworthy and undeserving to win, one has gone against the command of Allah concerning giving testimony.

By Hamdan Muhammad Hassan

16 June 1999.

5.0 Democracy and the Majority Principle in Islamic Legal-Political Thought

By Ermin Sinanovic

(http://www.geocities.com/pks_saudi/democracy_and_majority.html)

The Majority Principle is one of the cornerstones of democratic thought and practice. It is also one of the concepts that are often disputed by Muslims, many of whom claim that it has no place in Islamic political thought. This article will deal with the Islamic heritage in connection with the issue at hand. Its aims are to identify Islamic legal concepts that could possibly have a bearing on the topic of the study, examine those concepts critically, and ascertain if any of them could be related to the majority principle and majority decision-making.

5.1 Legal Concepts

A. Ijma' (Consensus)

Juristically speaking, ijma' is considered a source of law in Islamic legal theory. Its place is immediately after the textual sources, namely the Qur'an and Sunnah. Al-Ghazzali defined ijma' as "an agreement of the Ummah of Muhammad (SAW) in particular on any given religious matter." This definition implies that a necessary condition for ijma' is the unanimous agreement of all scholars of a particular age, at least in terms of theory. However, on a practical level, given the limitations imposed by the inefficiency of the means of communication and transportation during the early periods of Muslim history and inherent differences in ways humans approach intellectual challenges, it was impossible to establish actual agreement of all qualified scholars on a fairly great number of issues. In fact, according to some critics, ijma' was established only in those cases and on those issues that have some textual evidence from the Qur'an and Sunnah. But ijma' is not needed in cases in which there are clear Qur'anic and Prophetic references! One of the problems that contributed to the impracticability of ijma' is that the majority of Muslim jurists did not consider ijma' to be formed in cases of disagreement, even if this disagreement was the result of only one or two dissenting voices. Ibn Hajib al-Maliki, who holds a unique position, considered that an agreement of the majority of scholars could not be accepted as an ijma'. However, the opinion of such a majority is an authoritative evidence (hujjah) because it is more proper/appropriate (awla) to follow the majority opinion. In short, given these rigid conditions imposed by the majority of Muslim legal scholars with respect to the formation of ijma', it was only natural that this legal institution became highly theoretical and of almost insignificant value in the later periods of Muslim history. But the concept of ijma' can be studied from yet another perspective: the social one. The early phases in the development of Muslim society witnessed a number of dynamic processes that provided the necessary impetus to the development of Muslims sciences in general. Ijma', in particular, was a driving force which provided a vital degree of stability in spite of prolonged periods of internecine conflicts and possibly disrupting unresolved theological and legal issues. This was possible because ijma' was an informal activity, involving the community in general and the learned scholars and political leaders in particular. The prevalent atmosphere was such that scholars could express their opinion on any matter, and that opinion was very often not in line with the official policy of the day, for which action in turn they enjoyed almost undivided credibility among the public who adopted and internalized those teachings. Ijma' was, therefore, an outcome of the shura process at large; a process which involved a great number of members of the Muslim Ummah. It was not arrived at by some governmental fiat or scholarly debate, but it was achieved gradually, after a period of time, when numerous alternatives to the issue that was discussed have been presented, and when one of those alternatives that emerged as best in accordance with the prevalent sentiment among the Muslims and most beneficial for their personal interests and the interest of their religion. Ijma' was the result of social processes that aimed at discovering an objective truth in connection with the issue that has been raised by the community.

Many modern Muslim scholars, upon perceiving this tension between theoretical and practical ijma', made a number of proposal in order to revitalize this important institution. Most of the classical legal definitions of ijma' cannot satisfy the needs of modern Muslim societies. Ijma' should be defined in a way that makes it a dynamic force, one that enables it "to be no longer retrospective, as in the past, but to deal decisively with problems as and when they occur. [italics in original]"

Where would the place of the majority be if ijma' is to be reformulated? Well, it could be achieved through the majority decision-making if all the members of the community accept in advance that decisions by the majority are to be binding upon all of them. Thus, when a majority decision is reached, all the members of the Muslim community should strive towards seeing that decision implemented in practice. So, even those who voted against the proposal, which obtained the support of the majority, should accept the majority decision, and try to implement the new policy in a consensual fashion. If understood in this way, ijma' can be achieved through the implementation of the majority opinion. I have previously mentioned that some classical scholars were of opinion that the majority decision is an authoritative evidence (hujjah), even though it falls short of a consensus. Fathi Osman claims that this is one of the fundamentals (usul) that are widely held by the jurists. In fact, al-Shawi opines that the intended meaning of ijma' always equals shura, and that ijma' is, as a matter of fact, what is arrived at through the process of shura. A new thing that al-Shawi proposes is that ijma' can be achieved through total consensus (ijma' kamil) or through the consensus of the majority (ijma' al-jumhur).

This should in no way inhibit the defeated minority from trying to persuade the others to accept its view, if it still holds it, while accepting the majority decision and giving it its full support at the same time. In other words, there should exist a consensus on the basic rules of the political game and, more importantly, on the values of such a political system. Within such an arrangement, the existence of nonstructural opposition should be tolerated and it should be allowed to work for its own political program, given it accepts the basic consensus. In this way, the relation between majority decision and ijma' could be put into practice.

B. Al-Sawad al-A'zam

This concept originated in the Prophetic saying in which he (SAW) said: "My Ummah will not agree on an error, and when you see a disagreement you have to follow the majority." Al-Sindi, commenting on this tradition, had this to say: Al-Sawad al-A'zam means the majority group (al-jama'ah al-kathirah) because their agreement is closest to the consensus (ijma') … Al-Suyuti said [they were] a majority of those who are united in following the right course. This tradition indicates that it is mandatory to follow opinion of the majority (yanbaghi al-'amal bi qawl al-jumhur).

The hadith indicates that it is preferable to reach decisions in matters of common concern on a consensual basis. However, if this is not possible, then Muslims should, according to this tradition, follow the view(s) of the majority among them. This is probably the clearest injunction, that can be found either in the Qur'an or in the Sunnah, in connection with majority decision. Unfortunately, it was seldom related to the decision-making process, particularly after the period of al-Khulafa' al-Rashidun. A well-known contemporary Muslim scholar, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, uses the hadith in which al-sawad al-a'zam has been mentioned as evidence that in matters which are liable to be subject to a multitude of different opinions and on which a consensus cannot be achieved due to their not being supported by explicit evidence from the Qur'an and/or Sunnah, the majority principle can be used as a means of giving preference to one opinion over another. He says that this tradition, in fact, commands Muslims to follow the majority opinion in matters of disagreement. Muhammad Asad also quotes the mentioned hadith approvingly and deems it to constitute evidence that should be referred to in order to grasp a correct stance on the majority principle, which is, for him, that it should be allowed in matters of ijtihad, and that decisions reached through it should be binding upon all members of a Muslim society. I have already quoted al-Shawi who mentioned al-sawad al-a'zam or the majority as a possible meaning or outcome of shura, whereby he equals it with ijma'.

C. Jumhur

Another legal concept which is quite often mentioned in connection with the majority principle is that of jumhur. It literally means, among other things, 'gathering,' 'crowd,' 'great number,' or 'the majority.' The concept is used very often in legal literature. It ordinarily connotes the majority of scholars, usually in connection with an issue that is a subject of disagreement among Muslims. When such disagreement occurs, specialized literature usually gives a variety of opinions. As for that opinion which is held by the majority of scholars, the terms used are 'the opinion of the majority [of scholars]' (madhhab al-jumhur or ra'y al-jumhur), 'the majority of scholars' (jumhur al-'ulama') etc. The term is also sometimes used to denote the masses, i.e. the public in a general sense, or the great majority of them.

Those Muslims scholars, who see the concept of jumhur as a possible means of validation of the majority principle, point to the fact that Muslim legal scholars give preference to the opinion of the majority (i'tidad bi ra'y al-jumhur) in matters of disagreement, provided that there is no other more acceptable evidence that is contrary to it. According to Fathi Osman, Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728AH) suggested that when Abu Bakr (RA) nominated 'Umar (RA) for the office of khalifah and the proposal was subsequently endorsed, the legitimacy of bay'ah (the oath of allegiance, or the mechanism for the appointment of the head of the state) was established only after a majority of Companions (jumhur al-Sahabah) had agreed to it. Therefore, according to this reading of historical precedents, the appointment of the head of an Islamic state should be endorsed by a majority of the electorate. Al-Shawi adds to the debate on this concept by saying, as I have already quoted, that in the absence of a total consensus (ijma' kamil) reference should be made to 'the consensus of the majority' (ijma' al-jumhur), for the latter is the closest approximation to consensus in the proper sense. This is so for "the majority opinion or al-jumhur is indicative of the opinion of al-jama'ah (society) in al-shura."

D. Al-Tarjih bi al-Kathrah

Al-Tarjih is a legal concept that comes into play when there exist two or more apparently contradictory items of legal evidence that cannot be reconciled in any other way as provided by legal theory. So if this is the case, one opinion or evidence will be given preference or precedence over the other, based on the conditions stipulated by legal scholars. One of the applications of this concept occurs in case there are two Prophetic traditions whose meaning cannot be reconciled by any of the means that are in use by legal scholars. In this case, there are several ways in which al-tarjih can be applied. One of them is that the tradition which was transmitted by a greater number of transmitters should be given preference over the other which came through a lesser number of such transmitters of hadith (al-tarjih bi kathrah al-ruwat). This is a known principle in the sciences of al-hadith whereby, for instance, mutawatir is given preference over ahad if they happen to be in conflict. Al-Dahlawi maintained that in such cases preference should be given to a tradition that is transmitted by a greater number of narrators, or to that which is actually accepted in practice by a greater number of scholars. The great scholar of hadith, al-Bukhari (d.256AH), commenting on an issue on which there existed contradictory reports, chose one of those reports because it came "through a greater number of transmitters." Al-Arna'ut says that this is a common practice of the great scholars of hadith (huwa al-jari 'ala tariqah al-muhaqqiqin min ahl al-hadith). Let me clarify this argument with a quotation from another famous scholar, Ibn Daqiq al-'Id, who said:

If there are different (contradictory) reports [on a certain issue] … and if one of them is to be given preference over the other(s), such as in the case of one being transmitted by a greater number of transmitters … then it is an imperative to act in accordance with such a preferred [report] (fa yata'ayyan al-'amal bi al-rajih], because the [existence of the] weaker [evidence] is not a deterrent to act in accordance with the stronger [evidence]…

One of the few Muslim scholars who related this scholarly principle to political thought was Abu Hamid al-Ghazali. While discussing the merits of claims and counter-claims made by the 'Abbasid Caliphs and their Batinite opponents with regard to the legitimacy of the caliphate and political power, al-Ghazali uses the discourse similar to that of John Locke, and asserts that since it is not conceivable that those concerned with such an issue would unanimously agree on certain position, it is imperative that they should all accept and abide by the majority opinion (fa innahum law ikhtalafu … wajaba al-tarjih bi al-kathrah).

E. Legal Maxims (Al-Qawa'id al-Fiqhiyyah)

Legal maxims are not usually cited as supporting evidence for the legitimation of the majority principle. However, I find it useful to mention that some of these maxims can perhaps be used in discussion on this topic. It should probably be said, for the sake of clarification, that legal maxims, per se, are not a source of law, but can be useful juristic tools in finding solutions on issues which are not made explicit in the sources. Among the maxims that could give some additional weight to the majority principle are the following: "that what is preponderant [in greater quantity] should be ordained (bi al-aghlab min al-umur yuqda)"; "a more probable assumption amounts to the execution (al-zann al-ghalib yanzil manzilah al-tahqiq)"; "that which is preponderant [in greater number or quantity] is to be taken into consideration, and that which is rare is not to be enjoined (al-'ibrah bi al-ghalib wa al-nadir la hukm lah)"; "that which is preponderant amounts to an established/certain [opinion] (al-ghalib masaw li al-muhaqqaq)"; "the greater part gets the jurisdiction of the whole (li al-akthar hukm al-kull)."

5.2 The Majority Principle and Its Place in Shura

In this part of the article I will discuss two issues: the need for popular consultation and the reception of majority decision by all participants in the democratic process. In short, I deal with the majority principle and its possible place in shura. Shura is, in fact, the only political concept that has been mentioned in the Qur'an. While it has not been dealt with in details by the Revelation, Prophetic practice, as well as the practice of the Companions afterwards, have established some guiding principles with regard to this issue, and provided a direction in which this concept could possibly develop. It is a duty of the entire Muslim community to participate in the affairs that are of common concern to all its members. Fazlur Rahman rightly asserts that the Qur'anic verse '[the believers are] those whose affairs are decided by mutual consultation' (wa amruhum shura baynahum') "means their affairs - that is, the affair does not belong to an individual, a group or an elite, but it is "their common affair" and belongs to the community as a whole." One can easily point to the way in which the Prophet (SAW) consulted his Companions in all issues of common concern, except in those that were settled by Revelation, and to the examples that are abound in the books of history: he consulted his Companions prior to the battles of Badr, Uhud and Khandaq. After the Treaty of Hudaybiyah had been concluded he consulted his wife Umm Salamah (RA) concerning sacrificial animals. His Companions, following his example and the precepts of the Qur'an, deliberated with each other on a number of issues of public import, including the appointment of a successor to the Prophet (SAW), the legitimacy of fighting against rebellious Arabian tribes during the Khilafah of Abu Bakr (RA), the appointment of a successor to 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA) and so on.

Therefore, it can be clearly seen, Islam, in its pristine form, not only enjoined deliberation, consultation and free discussion of pertinent issues, but related them to belief (iman) and put them second in importance to the prescribed prayers (salat). In other words, one's belief cannot be complete without observing this particular principle of shura. This opinion is also supported by Fathi Osman who stated that "shura, or the participation in decision making by all parties concerned, [was] a consequence of faith in God and an obligation second in importance only to performing prayers to Him…"

After dealing with the importance and nature of shura in Islam, we should ask: is there a place for majority decision-making in shura ? The answer is definitely positive - for many reasons. Firstly, there are many directives and indications in Islamic legal and political thought that lend legitimacy to the use of the majority principle. Those that have been mentioned in this paper, ijma', al-tarjih bi al-kathrah, al-sawad al-a'zam and others, clearly show that it is basically acceptable to employ this principle. It should also be mentioned that shura is, in fact, a method of collective decision-making. It allows all the participants in that process to express their opinions and state the supportive evidence for those opinions. The objective of shura is to try to find an objectively correct opinion on a given issue, guided by Islamic principles. The participants in shura have to state their opinion on a given issue, not on the basis of their preference however, but on the basis of supporting evidence. In Islamic terms, this means that the opinion in question has to be supported by evidence from the Qur'an, Sunnah or other valid sources. In fact, the process of collective ijtihad can only benefit from having diverse opinions and their supporting evidence and arguments involved in the shura process. One can further say that shura is a process of trying to arrive at a correct answer in connection with the issue that is being deliberated upon by those who are qualified to participate in shura. There are several ways which facilitate this process and increase the probability of drawing a correct answer from the pool of available opinions or possibilities. In order to achieve this, one has to apply and use tools of ijtihad, both those that were accepted by our predecessors as well as those that are deemed appropriate by the contemporary generation of scholars. And one of these tools, as we have been trying to show in this article, is the majority principle.

It can be used independently of the other tools of ijtihad or in corroboration with them, as long as a proper code of conduct is observed by the participants in this process and as long as the outcome reflects belief that the correct opinion is being attained and the majority decision is accepted by all those participants. The accepted opinion then amounts to ijma', another concept that has been dealt with in this paper. Participants in this process should also be open to adopt new evidence and alter their initial stance in accordance with these newly obtained facts. As an outcome of this shuratic process, shura can achieve "the wide agreement in the Ummah so that it becomes the opinion of the majority of [Muslim] people." Therefore, shura, as we have tried to demonstrate in the preceding pages, can be said to have been fully observed only if there is participation by all mukallafun in society and if all abide by the outcome of their joint consultation.

6.0 Political System of Islam

(http://www.angelfire.com/sk3/ok5/dawa/politic.html)

Religion and politics are one and the same in Islam. They are intertwined. We already know that Islam is a complete system of life and politics is very much a part of our collective life. Just as Islam teaches us how to say Salah, observe Sawm, pay Zakah and undertake Hajj, so it teaches us how to run a state, from a government, elect councillors and members of parliament, make treaties and conduct business and commerce. Bear in mind that Islamic ruling system is not the same as the ruling system we have in the non-islamic countries.

A detailed discussion of the Islamic political system would be desirable, but we have to content ourselves with its basic principles and main features.

The Islamic Political System is based on the folloing main principles :

1. Sovereignty of Allah swt.

Sovereignty means the source of power. In Islam, Allah is the source of all powers and laws (3:154, 12:40, 25:2, 67:1). It is Allah who knows what is good and what is bad for His servants. His say is final.

All human beings unitedly cannot change His law. The Qu'an says, "As for the thief -male and female, chope off their hands. It is the reward of their own actions and exemplary punishment from Allah. Allah is Mighty, Wise." (5:37).
According to Islam, this order is unchangeable by any parliament or any government which claims itself to be Islamic (5:44, 2:229). There are many more laws in the Qur'an concerning our life and those laws must be put to practice by an Islamic state for the greater good of human beings.

2. Khilafah of Mankind (Vicegerency of man).

Man is the vicegerent, the agent or the representative of Allah swt on earth (2:30, 6:165). Allah is the sovereign and man is His representative. Man should do as Allah commands him to do. But he has a choice to either obey or disobey Allah and, because of this freedom of choice, he will be tested on the day of judgement. In the political sense, Khilafah means that human beings should implement the will of Allah on earth as His deputy or agent. As Allah's agents, human beings will carry out the will of Allah swt on His behalf as a trust (Amanah). Khilafah is a trust. An agent is always expected to behave as his master wants him to behave (10:14).

3. Legislation by Shura (Consultation).

Islam teaches us to run a government, to make legislation and decisions by the process of Shura. Shura means "to take decisions by consultation and participation" (3:159, 42:38). This is an important part of the Islamic political system. There is no scope for despotism in Islam. The Qur'an and the Sunnah will be the basis of legislation in Islam.

4. Accountability of government.

The Islamic political system makes the ruler and the government responsible firstly to Allah and then to the people. The rular and the government are elected by the people to exercise ‘powers on their behalf. We must remember here that both the ruler and the ruled are the Khalifah of Allah and the ruler shall have to work for the welfare of the people according to the Qur'an and Sunnah. A ruler is a servent of the people of Islam. Both the ruler and the ruled will appear before Allah swt and account for their actions on the day of judgement. The responsibility of the ruler is heaver than the ruled.

Any ordinary citizen of an Islamic state has the right to ask any question on any matter to the ruler and the government.

5. Independence of judiciary.

In the Islamic political system, the Judiciary is independent of the Executive. The head of the state or any government minister could be called to the court if necessary. They would be treated no differently from other citizens. The Qur'an has many injunctions about justice. One of the main functions of the Islamic state is to ensure justice to all citizens (4:58, 4:135, 5:8). The ruler and the government has no right to interfere in the system of justice.

6. Equality before law.

The Islamic political system ensures equality for all citizens before the law. It does not recognise any discrimination on the basis of language, colour, territory, sex or descent. Islam recognises the preference of one over the other only on the basis of Taqwa (piety or fear of God). One who fears Allah swt most is the noblest in Islam (49:13).

Conclusion

The duty of an Islamic state is to establish Salah and Zakah; promote the right and forbid the wrong (22:44). The state is responsible for the welfare of all its citizens - Muslims and non-Muslims alike. It must guarantee the basic necessities of life. All citizens of the Islamic state shall enjoy freedom of belief, thought, conscience and speech. Every citizen shall be free to develop his potential, improve his capacity, earn and possess. A citizen shall enjoy the right to support or oppose any government policy which he thinks right or wrong with the following in mind.:

The Islamic state is a duty bound to implement the laws of the Qur'an and the Sunnah. The Qur'an strongly denounces those who do not decide their matters by Allah's revelations (5:42-50).

The Islamic state shall ensure a fair distribution of wealth. Islam does not believe in equal distribution as it is against the law of creation.

There is not a single perfect Islamic state in the world today. There are many Muslim countries. An Islamic state is based on the model of Prophet Muhammad's (phuh) state in Madinah while a Muslim state is one which has a majority Muslim population and some Islamic features.
However, organised efforts have been going on in many Muslim countries to establish truly Islamic states. Al-ikhwanul Muslimun in the Middle East, Muzahid or Taliban in Afganistan, the Jama'at-e-Islami in Pakistan, and Kashmir, Jehaad movement in Bangladesh, (infor. source- BBC UK) Dewan Dakwah Islamia (Islamic Dawah Council) in Indonesia, Al-Muhajirun in Britain, and Hizb-ut-Tahrir in most advanced Islamic (muslim population) countries are some of the Islamic movements and parties which have been working for the re-establishment of Allah's law on Allah's land.

Let us pray and hope that a real Islamic state will emerge and guide the world towards justice, fair play and peace (very soon -if God wills).

7.0 Essential Features of the Islamic Political System

(http://www.jamaat.org/islam/IslamPol.html)

The political system of Islam is based on three principles: Tawhid (unity of Allah), Risalat (Prophethood) and Khilafat (vicegerency). It is difficult to appreciate the different aspects of Islamic polity without fully understanding these three principles. I will therefore begin with a brief exposition of what they are.

Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it ¾ organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves ¾ none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use.

This principle of the unity of Allah totally negates the concept of the legal and political independence of human beings, individually or collectively. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments are the Law.

The medium through which we receive the law of Allah is known as Risalat. We have received two things from this source: the Book in which Allah has set out His law, and the authoritative interpretation and exemplification of the Book by the Prophet, blessings and peace be on him through word and deed, in his capacity as the representative of Allah. The Prophet, blessings and peace be on him, has also, in accordance with the intention of the Divine Book, given us a model for the Islamic way of life by himself implementing the law and providing necessary details where required. The combination of these two elements is called the Shari‘ah.

Now consider Khilafat. According to the Arabic lexicon, it means ‘representation'. Man, according to Islam, is the representative of Allah on earth, His vicegerent. That is to say, by virtue of the powers delegated to him by Allah, he is required to exercise his Allah-given authority in this world within the limits prescribed by Allah.

Take, for example, the case of an estate which someone has been appointed to administer on your behalf. You will see that four conditions are invariably met. First, the real ownership of the estate remains vested in you and not in the administrator; second, he administers your property only in accordance with your instructions; third, he exercises his authority within the limits prescribed by you; and fourth, in the administration of the trust he executes your will and not his own. These four conditions are so inherent in the concept of ‘representation' that if any representative fails to observe them he will rightly be blamed for breaking the covenant which was implied in the concept of ‘representation'. This is exactly what Islam means when it affirms that man is the vicegerent of Allah on earth. Hence, these four conditions are also involved in the concept of Khilafat.

A state that is established in accordance with this political theory will in fact be a human caliphate under the sovereignty of Allah and will do Allah's will by working within the limits prescribed by Him and in accordance with His instructions and injunctions.

This is a new and revised translation of a talk given by the author on Radio Pakistan, Lahore, on 20th January, 1948.

7.1 Democracy in Islam

The above explanation of the term Khilafat also makes it abundantly clear that no individual or dynasty or class can be Khilafah, but that the authority of caliphate is bestowed on any community which accepts the principles of Tawhid and Risalat. In such a society, each individual shares the Allah-given caliphate. This is the point where democracy begins in Islam.

Every person in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of Allah and in this respect all individuals are equal. No one can deprive anyone of his rights and powers. The agency for running the affairs of the state will be established in accordance with the will of these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of the individual delegated to it. Their opinion will be decisive in the formation of the Government, which will be run with their advice and in accordance with their wishes. Whoever gains their confidence will carry out the duties of the caliphate on their behalf; and when he loses this confidence he will have to relinquish his office. In this respect the political system in Islam is as perfect a democracy as ever can be.

What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy is that while the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafat. In Western democracy the people are sovereign, in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own laws; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (Shari‘ah) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the Government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other Government and the people alike have to do the will of Allah. Western democracy is a kind of absolute authority which exercises its powers in a free and uncontrolled manner, whereas Islamic democracy is subservient to the Divine Law and exercises its authority in accordance with the injunctions of Allah and within the limits prescribed by Him.

7.2 Purpose of the Islamic State

The Holy Qur'an clearly states that the aim and purpose of this state, built on the foundation of Tawhid, Risalat and Khilafat, is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator of the universe wishes human life to be enriched by, and the prevention and eradication of those evils which are abhorrent to Allah. The state in Islam is not intended for political administration only nor for the fulfilment through it of the collective will of any particular set of people. Rather, Islam places a high ideal before the state for the achievement of which it must use all the means at its disposal. The aim is to encourage the qualities of purity, beauty, goodness, virtue, success and prosperity which Allah wants to flourish in the life of His people and to suppress all kinds of exploitation and injustice. As well as placing before us this high ideal, Islam clearly states the desired virtues and the undesirable evils. The Islamic state can thus plan its welfare programmes in every age and in any environment.

The constant demand made by Islam is that the principles of morality must be observed at all costs and in all walks of life. Hence, it lays down an unalterable requirement for the state to base its politics on justice, truth and honesty. It is not prepared, under any circumstances, to tolerate fraud, falsehood and injustice for the sake of political, administrative or national expediency. Whether it be relations between the rulers and the ruled within the state, or relations of the state with other states, precedence must always be given to truth, honesty and justice. It imposes obligations on the state similar to those it imposes on the individual: to fulfil all contracts and obligations; to have consistent standards in all dealings; to remember obligations as well as rights and not to forget the rights of others when expecting them to fulfil their obligations; to use power and authority for the establishment for justice and not for the perpetration of injustice; to look on duty as a sacred obligation; and to regard power as a trust from Allah to be used in the belief that one has to render an account of one's actions to Him in the Hereafter.

7.3 Fundamental Rights

Although an Islamic state may be set up anywhere on earth, Islam does not seek to restrict human rights or privileges to the geographical limits of its own state. Islam has laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity as a whole, which are to be observed and respected in all circumstances irrespective of whether a person lives on the territory of the Islamic state or outside it and whether he is at peace with the state or at war. For example, human blood is sacred and may not be spilled without justification; it is not permissible to oppress women, children, old people, the sick or the wounded; woman's honour and chastity must be respected in all circumstances; and the hungry must be fed, the naked clothed, and the wounded or diseased treated medically.

These, and a few other provisions, have been laid down by Islam as fundamental rights for every man by virtue of his status as a human being, to be enjoyed under the constitution of an Islamic state.

The rights of citizenship in Islam, however, are not confined to persons born within the limits of its state but are granted to every Muslim irrespective of his place of birth. A Muslim ipso facto becomes the citizen of an Islamic state as soon as he sets foot on its territory with the intention of living there; he thus enjoys equal rights of citizenship with those who are its citizens by birth. Citizenship must therefore be common to all the citizens of all the Islamic states that exist in the world; a Muslim will not need a passport for entry or exit from any of them. And every Muslim must be regarded as eligible for positions of the highest responsibility in an Islamic state without distinction of race, colour or class.

Islam has also laid down certain rights for non-Muslims who may be living within the boundaries of an Islamic state, and these rights must necessarily form part of the Islamic constitution. According to Islamic terminology such non-Muslims are called dhimmis (the covenanted), implying that the Islamic state has entered into a covenant with them and guaranteed their rights.

The life, property and honour of a dhimmi is to be respected and protected in exactly the same way as that of a Muslim citizen. There is no difference between Muslim and non-Muslim citizens in respect of civil or criminal law; and the Islamic state shall not interfere with the personal law of non-Muslims. They will have full freedom of conscience and belief and will be entitled to perform their religious rites and ceremonies. As well as being able to practise their religion, they are entitled to criticise Islam. However the rights given in this respect are not unlimited: the civil law of the country has to be fully respected and all criticism has to be made within its framework.

These rights are irrevocable and non-Muslims can only be deprived of them if they renounce the convenant which grants them citizenship. However much a non-Muslim state may oppress its Muslim citizens, it is not permissible for an Islamic state to retaliate against its non-Muslim subjects. This injunction holds good even if all the Muslims outside the boundaries of an Islamic state are massacred.

7.4 Executive and Legislature

The responsibility for the administration of the Government in an Islamic state is entrusted to an Amir (leader) who may be likened to the President or the Prime Minister in a Western democratic state. All adult men and women who accept the fundamentals of the constitution are entitled to vote in the election for the leader.

The basic qualifications for the election of an Amir are that he should command the confidence of the largest number of people in respect of his knowledge and grasp of the spirit of Islam; he should possess the Islamic attribute of fear of Allah; he should be endowed with the quality of statesmanship. In short, he should be both able and virtuous.

A Shura (consultative council), elected by the people, will assist and guide the Amir. It is obligatory for the Amir to administer the country with the advice of his Shura. The Amir can retain office only so long as he enjoys the confidence of the people, and must resign when he loses this confidence. Every citizen has the right to criticise the Amir and his Government, and all responsible means for the expression of public opinion should be available.

Legislation in an Islamic state should be within the limits prescribed by the Shari‘ah. The injunctions of Allah and His Prophet are to be accepted and obeyed and no legislative body can alter or modify them or make any new laws which are contrary to their spirit. The duty of ascertaining the real intent of those commandments which are open to more than one interpretation should devolve on people possessing a specialised knowledge of the law of Shari‘ah. Hence, such matters may have to be referred to a sub-committee of the Shã r~ comprising men learned in Islamic law. Great scope would still be available for legislation on questions not covered by any specific injunctions of the Shari‘ah, and the advisory council or legislature is free to legislate in regard to these matters.

In Islam the judiciary is not placed under the control of the executive. It derives its authority directly from the Shari‘ah and is answerable to Allah. The judges will obviously be appointed by the Government but, once appointed, will have to administer justice impartially according to the law of Allah. All the organs and functionaries of the Government should come within their jurisdiction: even the highest executive authority of the Government will be liable to be called upon to appear in a court of law as a plaintiff or defendant. Rulers and ruled are subject to the same law and there can be no discrimination on the basis of position, power or privilege. Islam stands for equality and scrupulously adheres to this principle in the social, economic and political realms alike.

8.0 The Political Framework Of Islam

(http://www.jamaat.org/islam/HumanRightsPolitical.html)

The political system of Islam is based on the three principles of towhid(Oneness of Allah), risala (Prophethood) and Khilifa(Caliphate).

Towhidmeans that one Allah alone is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it - organic or inorganic. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone. No aspect of life in all its multifarious forms ¾ our own organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over physical objects or the objects themselves ¾ has been created or a acquired by us in our own right. They are the bountiful provisions of Allah and have been bestowed on us by Him alone.

Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our worldly authority; nor does anyone else have the right to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah. This principle of the Oneness of Allah makes meaningless the concept of the legal and political sovereignty of human beings. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments constitute the law of Islam.

Risala is the medium through which we receive the law of Allah. We have received two things from this source: the Qur'an, the book in which Allah has expounded His law, and the authoritative interpretation and exemplification of that Book by the Prophet Muhammad (blessings of Allah and peace be upon him), through word and deed, in his capacity as the representative of Allah. The Qur'an laid down the broad principles on which human life should be based and the Prophet of Allah, in accordance with these principles, established a model system of Islamic life. The combination of these two elements is called the shari'a (law).

Khilifa means "representation". Man, according to Islam, is the representative of Allah on earth, His vice-gerent; that is to say, by virtue of the powers delegated to him by Allah, and within the limits prescribed, he is required to exercise Divine authority.

To illustrate what this means, let us take the case of an estate of yours which someone else has been appointed to administer on your behalf. Four conditions invariably obtain: First, the real ownership of the estate remains vested in you and not in the administrator; secondly, he administers your property directly in accordance with your instructions; thirdly, he exercises his authority within the limits prescribed by you; and fourthly, in the administration of the trust he executes your will and fulfils your intentions and not his own. Any representative who does not fulfil these four conditions will be abusing his authority and breaking the covenant which was implied in the concept of "representation".

This is exactly what Islam means when it affirms that man is the representative (khalifa) of Allah on earth. Hence, these four conditions are also involved in the concept of Khalifa. The state that is established in accordance with this political theory will in fact be a caliphate under the sovereignty of Allah.

8.1 Democracy In Islam

The above explanation of the term Khilafa also makes it clear that no individual or dynasty or class can be Khalifa: the authority of Khilafa is bestowed on the whole of any community which is ready to fulfil the conditions of representation after subscribing to the principles of towhid and Risala. Such a society carries the responsibility of the Khilafa as a whole and each one of its individuals shares in it.

This is the point where democracy begins in Islam. Every individual in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of Allah and in this respect all individuals are equal. No-one may deprive anyone else of his rights and powers. The agency for running the affairs of the state will be formed by agreement with these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of the individuals delegated to it. Their opinion will be decisive in the formation of the government, which will be run with their advice and in accordance with their wishes.

Whoever gains their confidence will undertake the duties and obligations of the caliphate on their behalf; and when he loses this confidence he will have to step down. In this respect the political system of Islam is as perfect a dorm of democracy as there can be.

What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy, therefor, is that the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty, while the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafa. In Western democracy, the people are sovereign; in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (shari'a) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other the government and the people have to fulfil the will of Allah.

The Purpose Of The Islamic State

We are now in a position to examine more closely the type of state which is built on the foundations of tawhid, Risala and Khilafa.

The Holy Qur'an clearly states that the aim and purpose of this state is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator wishes human life to be enriched by and the prevention and eradication of those evils in human life which He finds abhorrent. The Islamic state is intended neither solely as an instrument of political administration nor for the fulfillment of the collective will of any particular set of people; rather, Islam places a high ideal before the state for the achievement of which it must use all the means at its disposal.

This ideal is that the qualities of purity, beauty, goodness, virtue, success and prosperity which Allah wants to flourish in the life of His people should be engendered and developed and that all kinds of exploitation, injustice and disorder which, in the sight of Allah, are ruinous for the world and detrimental to the life of His creatures, should be suppressed and prevented. Islam gives us a clear outline of its moral system by stating positively the desired virtues and the undesired evils. Keeping this outline in view, the Islamic state can plan its welfare programme in every age and in any environment.

The constant demand made by Islam is that the principles of morality must be observed at all costs and in all walks of life. Hence, it lays down as an unalterable policy that the state should base its policies on justice, truth and honesty. It is not prepared, under any circumstances, to tolerate fraud, falsehood and injustice for the sake of political, administrative or national expediency. Whether it be relations between the rulers and the ruled within the state, or the relations of the state with other states, precedence must always be given to truth, honesty and justice.

Islam imposes similar obligations on the state and the individual: to fulfil all contracts and obligations; to have uniform standards in dealings; to remember obligations along with rights and not to forget the rights of others when expecting them to fulfil their obligations; to use power and authority for the establishment of justice and not for the perpetration of injustice; to look upon duty as a sacred obligation and to fulfil it scrupulously; and to regard power as a trust from Allah to be used in the belief that one has to render an account of one's actions to Him in the life Hereafter.

8.2 Fundamental Rights

Although an Islamic state may be set up anywhere on earth, Islam does not seek to restrict human rights or privileges to the boundaries of such a state. Islam has laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity which are to be observed and respected in all circumstances. For example, human blood is sacred and may not be spilled without strong justification; it is not permissible to oppress women, children, old people, the sick or the wounded; women's honour and chastity must be respected; the hungry must be fed, the naked clothed and the wounded or diseased treated medically irrespective of whether they belong to the Islamic community or are from amongst its enemies. These, and other provisions have been laid down by Islam as fundamental rights for every man by virtue of his status as a human being.

Nor, in Islam, are the rights of citizenship confined to people born in a particular state. A Muslim ipso facto becomes the citizen of an Islamic state as soon as he sets foot on its territory with the intention of living there and thus enjoys equal rights along with those who acquire its citizenship by birth. And every Muslim is to be regarded as eligible for positions of the highest responsibility in an Islamic state without distinction of race, colour or class.

Islam has also laid down certain rights for non-Muslims who may be living within the boundaries of an Islamic state and these rights necessarily form part of the Islamic constitution. In Islamic terminology, such non-Muslims are called dhimmis (the covenanted), implying that the Islamic state has entered into a covenant with them and guaranteed their protection. The life, property and honour of a dhimmis is to be respected and protected in exactly the same way as that of a Muslim citizen. Nor is there difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim citizen in respect of civil or criminal law.

The Islamic state may not interfere with the personal rights of non-Muslims, who have full freedom of conscience and belief and are at liberty to perform their religious rites and ceremonies in their own way. Not only may they propagate their religion, they are even entitled to criticize Islam within the limits laid down by law and decency.

These rights are irrevocable. Non-Muslims cannot be deprived of them unless they renounce the covenant which grants them citizenship. However much a non-Muslim state may oppress its Muslim citizens it is not permissible for an Islamic state to retaliate against its non-Muslim subjects; even if all the Muslims outside the boundaries of an Islamic state are massacred, that state may not unjustly shed the blood of a single non-Muslim citizen living within its boundaries.

8.3 Executive And Legislature

The responsibility for the administration of the government in an Islamic state is entrusted to an amir (leader) who may be compared to the president or the prime minister in a Western democratic state. All adult men and women who subscribe to the fundamentals of the constitution are entitled to vote for the election of the amir.

The basic qualifications for an amir are that he should command the confidence of the majority in respect of his knowledge and grasp of the spirit of Islam, that he should possess the Islamic quality of fear of Allah and that he should be endowed with qualities of statesmanship. In short, he should have both virtue and ability.

A shoora(advisory council) is also elected by the people to assist and guide the amir. It is incumbent on the amir to administer his country with the advice of this shooraThe amir may retain office only so long as he enjoys the confidence of the people and must relinquish it when he loses that confidence. Every citizen has the right to criticize the amir and his government and all reasonable means for the ventilation of public opinion must be available.

Legislation in an Islamic state is to be carried out within the limits prescribed by the law of the shari'a. The injunctions of Allah and His Prophet are to be accepted and obeyed and no legislative body may alter or modify them or make any law contrary to them. Those commandments which are liable to two or more interpretations are referred to a sub-committee of the advisory council comprising men learned in Islamic law. Great scope remains for legislation on questions not covered by specific injunctions of the shari'a and the advisory council or legislature is free to legislate in regard to these matters.

In Islam the judiciary is not places under the control of the executive. It derives its authority directly from the shari'a and is answerable to Allah. The judges are appointed by the government but once a judge occupies the bench he has to administer justice impartially according to the law of Allah; the organs and functionaries of the government are not outside his legal jurisdiction, so that even the highest executive authority of the government is liable to be called upon to appear in a court of law as a plaintiff or defendant. Rulers and ruled are subject to the same law and there can be no discrimination on the basis of position, power or privilege, Islam stands for equality and scrupulously adheres to this principle in social, economic and political realms alike.

Human Rights, The West And Islam

The Western Approach

People in the West have the habit of attributing every beneficial development in the world to themselves. For example, it is vociferously claimed that the world first derived the concept of basic human rights from the Magna Carta of Britain - which was drawn up six hundred years after the advent of Islam. But the truth is that until the seventeenth century of no-one dreamt of arguing that the Magna Carta contained the principles of trial by jury, Habeas Corpus and control by Parliament of the right of taxation. If the people who drafted the Magna Carta were living today they would be greatly surprised to be told that their document enshrined these ideals and principles.

To the best of my knowledge, the West had no concept of human and civic rights before the seventeenth century; and it was not until the end of the eighteenth century that the concept took on practical meaning in the constitutions of America and France.

After this, although there appeared references to basic human rights in the constitutions of many countries, more often than not these rights existed only on paper. In the middle of the present century, the United Nations, which may now be more aptly described as the Divided Nations, made a Declaration of Universal Human Rights, and passed a resolution condemning genocide; regulations were framed to prevent it. But there is not a single resolution or regulation of the United Nations which can be enforced if the country concerned wants to prevent it. They are just expressions of pious hopes. They have no sanctions behind them, no force, physical or moral, to enforce them. Despite all the high-sounding resolutions of the United Nations, human rights continue to be violated and trampled upon.

8.4 The Islamic Approach

When we speak of human rights in Islam we mean those rights granted by Allah. Rights granted by kings or legislative assemblies can be withdrawn as easily as they are conferred; but no individual and no institution has the authority to withdraw the rights conferred by Allah.

The charter and the proclamations and the resolutions of the United Nations cannot be compared with the rights sanctioned by Allah; the former are not obligatory on anybody, while the latter are an integral part of the Islamic faith. All Muslims and all administrators who claim to be Muslim have to accept, recognize and enforce them. If they failed to enforce them or violate them while paying lip-service to them, the verdict of the Holy Qur'an is unequivocal :

"Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down are the disbelievers (Kafirun)." (5:44)

The following verse also proclaims :

"They are the wrong-doers (zalimoon)". (5:45)

A third verse in the same chapter says:

"They are the perverse and law-breakers (fasiqoon)." (5:47)

In other words, if temporal authorities regard their own words and decisions as right and those given by Allah as wrong, they are disbelievers. If, on the other hand, they regard Allah's commands as right but deliberately reject them in favour of their owns decisions, then they are wrong-doers. Law-breakers are those who disregard the bond of allegiance.

9.0 Women and Politics in Islam

(http://www.submission.org/women/politics.html)

In the Name of God Most Gracious Most Merciful

One of the major controversial issues in Religion of Islam for those who do not know the truth in the Quran is the woman's role in the political system or in leadership. Can a woman assume the
leadership role? Is there a prohibition?

The answer is clear in God's scripture - the Quran. If the source is man made books (Hadith written 200+ years after the revelation of the Quran) a view of subjugation of women and denial of rights in the political system emerges.

God gives stories in the Quran to establish precedents and to provide us guidance and teachings.

"We narrate to you the most accurate history through the revelation of this Quran. Before this, you were totally unaware." 12:3

"In their history, there is a lesson for those who possess intelligence......" 12:111

The role of woman in the history of the world is demonstrated in the story of Belquees, the Queen of Sheba. See 27:22-44. God gave us her history in the Quran, to set a precedent that a woman in a political leadership is not offensive to God.

She represented a democratic ruler who consulted with her people
before making important decisions (27:29). She visited Solomon, talked to him and made decisions for herself and her people.

After witnessing what God gave Solomon, she became a submitter (Muslim), while still the Queen of Sheba.

"She was told, "Go inside the palace." When she saw its interior, she thought it was a pool of water, and she (pulled up her dress) exposing her legs. He said, "This interior is now paved with crystal." She said, "MY LORD, I HAVE WRONGED MY SOUL. I NOW SUBMIT WITH SOLOMON TO GOD, LORD OF THE UNIVERSE."

Here we witness one of the first Muslim woman in charge of a nation, ruling them as the Queen of Sheba.

Sheba's history provides us lessons that God has placed no restrictions on a woman in a leadership role. Contrary to what the traditional Muslim scholars and man-made Hadith books advocate, a woman as a political leader or Head of State is not against God's system or against the Quran. It might be against the chauvinistic views of the men who wrote the corrupted books of Hadiths.

The Muslims scholars and clerics advocate completely the opposite and contradict the Quran.

In one of the most famous Hadiths (man written books/stories) that is often raised in the face of any Muslim woman seeking higher education or higher position in her career is one by a man called Abu Bakra who narrated a Hadith reported in Bukhary that states that any community ruled by a woman will never succeed.

The fallacy of this Hadith is not only proven in history but in the fact that Abu Bakra himself was reported in the Muslim history books to be punished publicly for bearing false witness. Despite this known story of his bearing false witness, Bukhary did not remove his Hadith from among his collected Hadiths according to the rules that Bukhary himself claimed to follow. Such a bearer of false witness should never be allowed or accepted as a witness ever, according to the Quran. 24:4. Bukhary did not follow the Quran or his own rules. We guess he liked the degrading of women he found in this hadith.

We need only to look at what God is teaching us in His only acceptable Hadith (77:50 - the Quran itself). All of us have a choice, either believe God and His book or believe Bukhary and other men who contradict the Quran. Only those who choose God will
be the successful ones.

10.0 Islam and Democracy

By John L. Esposito and John O. Voll

(http://www.neh.gov/news/humanities/2001-11/islam.html)

The relationship between Islam and democracy in the contemporary world is complex. The Muslim world is not ideologically monolithic. It presents a broad spectrum of perspectives ranging from the extremes of those who deny a connection between Islam and democracy to those who argue that Islam requires a democratic system. In between the extremes, in a number of countries where Muslims are a majority, many Muslims believe that Islam is a support for democracy even though their particular political system is not explicitly defined as Islamic.

Throughout the Muslim world in the twentieth century, many groups that identify themselves explicitly as Islamic attempted to participate directly in the democratic processes as regimes were overthrown in Eastern Europe, Africa, and elsewhere. In Iran such groups controlled and defined the system as a whole; in other areas, the explicitly Islamic groups were participating in systems that were more secular in structure. The participation of self-identified Islamically oriented groups in elections, and in democratic processes in general, aroused considerable controversy. People who believe that secular approaches and a separation of religion and politics are an essential part of democracy argue that Islamist groups only advocate democracy as a tactic to gain political power. They say Islamist groups support “one man, one vote, one time.” In Algeria and Turkey, following electoral successes by parties thought to be religiously threatening to the existing political regimes, the Islamic political parties were restricted legally or suppressed.

The relationship between Islam and democracy is strongly debated among the people who identify with the Islamic resurgence in the late twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first. Some of these Islamists believe that “democracy” is a foreign concept that has been imposed by Westernizers and secular reformers upon Muslim societies. They often argue that the concept of popular sovereignty denies the fundamental Islamic affirmation of the sovereignty of God and is, therefore, a form of idolatry. People holding these views are less likely to be the ones participating in elections. Many limit themselves to participating in intellectual debates in the media, and others hold themselves aloof from the political dynamics of their societies, hoping that their own isolated community will in some way be an inspiration to the broader Muslim community. Many prominent Islamic intellectuals and groups, however, argue that Islam and democracy are compatible. Some extend the argument to affirm that under the conditions of the contemporary world, democracy can be considered a requirement of Islam.In these discussions, Muslim scholars bring historically important concepts from within the Islamic tradition together with the basic concepts of democracy as understood in the modern world.

The process in the Muslim world is similar to that which has taken place within other major religious traditions. All of the great world faith traditions represent major bodies of ideas, visions, and concepts fundamental to understanding human life and destiny.

Many of these significant concepts have been used in different ways in different periods of history. The Christian tradition, for example, in premodern times provided a conceptual foundation for divine right monarchy; in contemporary times, it fosters the concept that Christianity and democracy are truly compatible. In all traditions, there are intellectual and ideological resources that can provide the justification for absolute monarchy or for democracy. The controversies arise regarding how basic concepts are to be understood and implemented.

A relatively neutral starting point for Muslims is presented in a 1992 interview in the London Observer with the Tunisian Islamist leader and political exile, Rashid Ghanoushi: “If by democracy is meant the liberal model of government prevailing in the West, a system under which the people freely choose their representatives and leaders, in which there is an alternation of power, as well as all freedoms and human rights for the public, then Muslims will find nothing in their religion to oppose democracy, and it is not in their interests to do so.” Many Muslims, including Ghanoushi himself, go beyond this and view democracy as an appropriate way to fulfill certain obligations of the faith in the contemporary world.

The Islamic tradition contains a number of key concepts that are presented by Muslims as the key to “Islamic democracy.” Most would agree that it is important for Muslims not simply to copy what non-Muslims have done in creating democratic systems, emphasizing that there are different forms that legitimate democracy can take. Iran's President Mohammad Khatami, in a television interview in June before that country's presidential elections, noted that “the existing democracies do not necessarily follow one formula or aspect. It is possible that a democracy may lead to a liberal system. It is possible that democracy may lead to a socialist system. Or it may be a democracy with the inclusion of religious norms in the government. We have accepted the third option.” Khatami presents a view common among the advocates of Islamic democracy that “today world democracies are suffering from a major vacuum, which is the vacuum of spirituality,” and that Islam can provide the framework for combining democracy with spirituality and religious government.

The synthesis of spirituality and government builds on a fundamental affirmation at the heart of Islam: the proclamation that “There is no divinity but The God” and the affirmation of the “oneness” of God. This concept, called tawhid, provides the foundation for the idea that one cannot separate different aspects of life into separate compartments. Ali Shariati, who made important contributions to the ideological development of the Islamic revolution in Iran, wrote in On the Sociology of Islam, that tawhid “in the sense of oneness of God is of course accepted by all monotheists. But tauhid as a world view . . . means regarding the whole universe as a unity, instead of dividing it into this world and the here-after . . . spirit and body.” In this worldview, the separation of religion from politics creates a spiritual vacuum in the public arena and opens the way for political systems that have no sense of moral values. From such a perspective, a secular state opens the way for the abuse of power. The experiences of Muslim societies with military regimes that are secularist in ideological origin, such as the Baath Arab Socialist regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, reinforce this mistrust of separating religious values from politics.

Advocates of Islamic democracy argue that the Oneness of God requires some form of democratic system; conservatives contend that the idea of the sovereignty of the people contradicts the sovereignty of God; often the alternative then becomes some form of a monarchical system. The response to this is an affirmation of tawhid, as expressed by a Sudanese intellectual, Abdelwahab El-Affendi, in the October 2000 edition of Islam 21: “No Muslim questions the sovereignty of God or the rule of Shari'ah [the Islamic legal path]. However, most Muslims do (and did) have misgivings about any claims by one person that he is sovereign. The sovereignty of one man contradicts the sovereignty of God, for all men are equal in front of God. . . . Blind obedience to one-man rule is contrary to Islam.” In this way, it is argued that the doctrine of tawhid virtually requires a democratic system because humans are all created equal and any system that denies that equality is not Islamic.

There are a number of specific concepts that Muslims cite when they explain the relationship between Islam and democracy. In the Qur'an, the righteous are described as those people who, among other things, manage their affairs through “mutual consultation” or shura (42:38 Qur'an). This is expanded through traditions of the Prophet and the sayings and actions of the early leaders of the Muslim community to mean that it is obligatory for Muslims in managing their political affairs to engage in mutual consultation. Contemporary Muslim thinkers ranging from relatively conservative Islamists to more liberal modernists to Shi'ite activists emphasize the importance of consultation. There would be little disagreement with the view of Ayatollah Baqir al-Sadr, the Iraqi Shi'ite leader who was executed by Saddam Hussein in 1980, who said in Islamic Political System, that the people “have a general right to dispose of their affairs on the basis of the principle of consultation.” What this meant for the constitutional system of the Islamic Republic of Iran, which was influenced by al-Sadr's thought, was affirmed by President Khatami in last June's interview: the “people play a fundamental role in bringing a government to power, in supervising the government and possibly the replacement of the government without any tension and problems.”

Another basic concept in the development of Islamic democracy is “caliph.” In contemporary discussions, traditional political usage of the term caliph has been redefined. Historically the term caliph was used as the title of the monarchs who ruled the medieval Muslim empire. When medieval Muslim political philosophers spoke of the institutions of caliphal rule, the caliphate, they were were analyzing the political institution of the successors to the Prophet Muhammad as the leader of the Muslim community. However, this concept of the caliphate was something that developed after the death of the Prophet.

In the Qur'an, the Arabic words for caliph (khalifah) and caliphate (khilafah) have a different meaning. These terms in the Qur'an have the more general meaning of steward and stewardship or trustee and trusteeship. In this way, Adam, as the first human, is identified as God's caliph or steward on earth (2:30). Muhammad is instructed to remind humans that God made them the caliphs (stewards or trustees) of the earth (6:165). In this way, in the Qur'an, the term caliphate refers to the broad responsibilities of humans to be the stewards of God's creation.

By the late twentieth century, long after the last vestiges of the political caliphate had been abolished by the reforms of Ataturk in Turkey in 1924, Muslim intellectuals began to see the importance of the concept of all humans as “caliphs” or God's stewards. As the intellectual dimensions of the late twentieth-century Islamic resurgence became more clearly defined, Ismail al-Faruqi, a scholar of Palestinian origins, outlined an ambitious project in a small book, Islamization of Knowledge. The concept of the caliphate involved responsibilities for all humans, in all dimensions of life, but especially the political: “Rightly, Muslims understand khilafah as directly political. . . . Islam requires that every Muslim be politicized (i.e., awakened, organized, and mobilized).”

The implications of this reassertion of a more explicitly Qur'anic meaning of human stewardship for Islamic democracy were spelled out by the South Asian Islamist leader, Abu al-Ala Mawdudi in The Islamic Way of Life: “The authority of the caliphate is bestowed on the entire group of people, the community as a whole. . . . Such a society carries the responsibility of the caliphate as a whole and each one of its individual[s] shares the Divine Caliphate. This is the point where democracy begins in Islam. Every person in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of God and in this respect all individuals are equal.”

In theory and concept, Islamic democracy is, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, quite well developed and persuasive. In actual practice the results have been less encouraging. Authoritarian rulers such as Ja'far Numayri in Sudan and Zia al-Haqq in Pakistan initiated formal programs of Islamization of the law and political system in the 1980s with results that were not encouraging for democracy. A military coup brought a combination of military and civilian Islamists to rule in Sudan in 1989 and despite the proclaimed goal of creating an Islamic democracy, the regime's human rights record in terms of treatment of non-Muslim minorities and Muslim opposition groups is deplorable.

International human rights groups have also been critical of the treatment of non-Muslim minorities in Iran, where the Shah was overthrown in 1979. During its first decade, the Islamic Republic set narrow limitations on political participation. However, the end of the nineties saw the unprecedented presidential election victory of Mohammad Khatami, who had not been favored by the conservative religious establishment. He was reelected by an overwhelming majority again in 2001. Although there are continuing grounds for criticizing Iran in terms of its repression of opposition and minorities, increasing numbers of women and youth are voting in elections. Instead of “one man, one vote, one time,” the “one man” is being joined by “one woman” as a voting force.

Beyond the formally proclaimed Islamic political systems, there has also been an increasing role for democracy with an Islamic tone. In many countries, Muslims who are not activist Islamists have participated in electoral processes and brought a growing sense of the need for morality and Islamic awareness in the political arena. In an era when politics in many countries is becoming “desecularized,” leaders of Islamic organizations play important roles in electoral political systems that are not explicitly identified as Islamic. When the military regime of Suharto in Indonesia was brought to an end, the person who became president in 1999 as a result of the first open elections was Abd al-Rahman Wahid, the leader of Nahdat ul-Ulama, perhaps the largest Islamic organization in the world. He did not campaign on a platform of Islamizing the political system, even though he participated in the democratic system as a clearly identifiable Islamic leader. When he was removed as president this year, it was by a process of orderly replacement, and neither his followers nor his opponents engaged in religious warfare.

Similarly, Islamically oriented political parties have operated successfully in the secular electoral politics of Turkey, with the leader of one such party, Necmettin Erbakan, serving as prime minister briefly in 1996-1997. Although in succession, the Islamically oriented Turkish parties have been suppressed and many of their leaders jailed, the response of the people in the parties has simply been to form new parties and try again within the political system rather than withdrawing into a violent underground opposition.

The Turkish experience reflects the fact that many Muslims, whether living in formally secular or formally Islamic states, see democracy as their main hope and vehicle of effective political participation. One important dimension of this participation is that despite conservative Muslim opposition to the idea of rule by a woman, the three largest Muslim states in the world -- Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Pakistan -- have had or now have elected women as their heads of government. None of these women was explicitly Islamist and one was directly opposed by an Islamist party.

In this complex context, it is clear that Islam is not inherently incompatible with democracy. “Political Islam” is sometimes a program for religious democracy and not primarily an agenda for holy war or terrorism.

Islam and Democracy (Oxford University Press, 1966) has been translated into a number of languages, including Arabic, Turkish, Japanese, and Indonesian. John O. Voll received $126,058 from NEH to conduct a Summer Institute for College Teachers on modern Islam and John L. Esposito received $126,058 to research the works of modern Muslim scholar-activists.