The Islamic State & The “Civil State”
First Edition 2011
Bismillah al-Rahman al-Raheem
Introduction
The Islamic world, especially in the Arabic-speaking countries, is currently experiencing severe birth pangs, the consequences of which will be decisive either in favour of the Islamic Ummah, or the Kuffar under the leadership of America, Allah forbid. The real plane of the battle is cultural, i.e. a battle of thoughts, or what America has labelled as the “Battle for Hearts and Minds”. Military battles result in killing people and destroying equipment and properties, whereas the battles of thoughts result in directing the behaviour of nations and individuals, transforming their way of life and changing their raison d’être. They are the most dangerous and the fiercest of battles and their knock-on effect on nations and peoples could last for decades and even centuries in some cases.
The real battle that toppled the Ottoman Islamic Khilafah was a battle of thoughts; the rules of Islam were attacked because they supposedly were behind the times, the bond of Islamic fraternity was attacked by the incitement of ethnic tendencies and the post of Khilafah was attacked, sometimes because it purportedly represented dictatorship and sometimes because it was allegedly theocratic, i.e. a divine authority, since the Khalifah to the Muslims was like the Pope to the Christians, though there was no room for comparison between the two posts. Some educated individuals smitten by the concepts of Western civilisation at that time were duped into thinking that separating religion from the state would achieve progress.
Once the state started to stagger under the influence of the cultural invasion that targeted the Ummah, who had been experiencing a state of intellectual decline, some of its citizens delivered the coup de grace from within when under the tutelage of the Kafir West, the traitor Mustafa Kemal Ataturk announced the abolition of the post of Khilafah and declared Turkey as a nationalist secular state that separated religion from life. Once the Ottoman Khilafah was destroyed, the colonial powers shared the lands of Islam and fragmented them into states and emirates, drawing their borders and establishing for each an army, a constitution and laws; they also established for each new state a flag, a capital and a ruler – guardian of the Western interests. They consolidated this fragmentation with independence days to effectively celebrate the dividing of the Muslims’ lands.
The new states were originally established on the basis of separating Islam from the life of the Muslims, discarding it from the transactional affairs of the state and society and confining it to the relationship of the individual with Allah (swt), i.e. the rituals.
The Islamic Ummah is always magnetised towards her Islam irrespective of the multiple styles of deception targeting her to strip her off her religion and its rules, because she is a noble nation and she only finds delight in the system of Islam. Although she was oblivious to the division of the lands of Islam after she had been deceived, she does not relish division because Shari’ah calls for the rejection of division. Hence, the secular regimes that ruled the Islamic countries after the destruction of the Khilafah were characterised with oppression and an iron-fist to prevent people from making their real choice, as secularism, i.e. separating religion from life, had never been a real choice for the Ummah.
In the middle of the 20th century and about 25 years after the destruction of the Khilafah, the Da’awah (call) for the resumption of the Islamic way of life by restoring Islam as the foundation of the State emerged, exhorting the Ummah to refer her affairs to Islam’s rules and laws. This Da’awah drew the attention of Ummah anew to come round from her slumber and take heed of her religion which had been the authority in her life, the sole reference point in her affairs and the cause of her happiness, pride and pre-eminence among other nations.
Towards the end of the seventies in the past century, and after the eruption of the revolution in Iran with the emergence of a regime announcing its rise on the basis of Islam, the Muslims became aware of the practicable return of the rule by Islam. The pace of the Da’awah for restoring Islam as a ruling authority gathered momentum and the West dubbed the ensuing period as the “Islamic Awakening”.
America however, who had been behind the toppling of the Shah by exploiting the Ummah’s genuine love of her Islam and using it then to declare the “Jihad in Afghanistan” to destabilise the Soviet Union, was herself behind the plot to strike the Twin Towers. This was in order to instigate the “War on Terror”, the main objective of which was to extinguish the spark of the Ummah’s awakening that had started to ignite the fervour of the Muslim youths to gain more awareness about the reality of Islam and to work towards restoring it in the realm of life by establishing the authority upon its basis. Thus, the policy of combating terror was the pretext aimed at aborting that phenomenon, which began to petrify the Kafir West headed by America.
The Western Kuffar, led by America, are fully aware that the persistent awakening of the Ummah with such an impetus and at that growing pace will inevitably place them on a collision course with the Islamic Ummah; thus they hastened to put their plans into motion after they had carried out extensive studies with the help of research centres that dedicated all their efforts for the monitoring of that awakening and its consequences. Then they immediately embarked upon executing their plans to divert that awakening and fight it with all means possible, including killing, detaining, and torturing the Muslim youths who were eager to support their religion, in addition to diverting their progress and distorting their reputation and the image of Islam in the eyes of the Muslims and the other nations and states, using their enormous propaganda machine and exploiting the media outlets of their surrogates and agents from among the gang leaders whom America appointed to rule the Muslims’ countries.
The American version of the Greater Middle East Initiative was announced in 2004 during the G8 summit. After extensive deliberations on the French and German projects and following the counsel of a host of experts, it was decided to refrain from referring to any of the proposed projects as the “project for the Islamic World” and from any reference to Islam, so as not to arouse the attention of the Muslims to the animosity of the Kafir West, led by America, towards Islam and Muslims. Notwithstanding, dubbing the project as the “Greater Middle East Initiative” is more accurate since most of the countries of the Islamic world were geographically added to the project; the Greater Middle East Initiative includes the Islamic countries from Afghanistan in the east to Morocco and Mauritania in the west, and from Turkey in the north to Yemen and Sudan in the south.
The main objective of the Greater Middle East Initiative is to reshape the region of the Islamic world in a manner that would secure America’s unilateral dominion in the 21st century. America realised that safeguarding her dominion requires predominantly alienating Islam from the realm of life, i.e. maintaining the separation of religion from running the affairs of the Islamic Ummah and preventing the Ummah from thinking about resuming her life on the basis of Islam. This could only be brought about by persuading the Ummah of the necessity to keep Islam away from politics, i.e. away from the state, authority and management of the Ummah’s affairs, and confine it to the relationship between the servant and his Lord, namely the “spiritual worships”.
Keeping Islam away from the life of Muslims entails the following:
• Generating a conviction among the Muslims themselves about the necessity of keeping Islam away from attaining power, i.e. away from the life of the Ummah, under a host of pretexts such as: averting the world’s backlash against Muslims, coyness about the image of Islam that the West had succeeded in linking to “extremism”, “terrorism” and savagery, in addition to the West having strived hard to link the image of Islam to backwardness.
• Concentrating the Western thought, some of the jargons which have been endorsed, such as democracy, pluralism and general freedoms. One of the first declared aims of the Greater Middle East Initiative was to spread democracy and “sound government”.
• The most dangerous undertaking of the West in its bid to alienate real Islam from life is formulating a new Islam that conforms to the American pattern, namely the “democratic civil Islam”, by shrouding the Kufr concepts with a “legitimate” cloak to pacify the emotions of the Muslim laymen, forfeit the landscapes of real Islam and dilute its thoughts under the pretext of concord between Islam and secularism. The “democratic civil Islam” that America is calling for is nothing but secularism in a deceitful cloak. She had planned for Turkey to play a meticulous “regional” role in the Greater Middle East to propagate the new American religion. America wants to generalise the Turkish model and turn it into an archetype with the aim of concentrating secularism in the Muslims’ countries at the hands of what they refer to as “moderate Muslims”. Former US President Bill Clinton heralded the role of Turkey when he addressed the Turkish parliament by saying: “But, more importantly, I believe Turkey’s future will be critical to shaping the 21st century.” Hence, the pilgrimage of al-Ghannoushi and some of his comrades to Turkey to acquaint themselves with aspects of the Turkish experiment on coexistence between Islam and secularism comes as no surprise; the conspicuous stance of Turkey vis-à-vis the events of the region and her support of the masses in what has been dubbed as the revolutions of the “Arab Spring” should also not surprise us.
• Renewing the Western thought afresh, i.e. “renewing secularism” by designing a host of new jargons and slogans that do not evoke the emotions of the Muslims and which are susceptible to elucidation and interpretation in conformity with Islam, such as the jargons of “sound government”, “reforms”, “civil society”, “civil state” and the like.
The Civil State
The concept of the civil state has cropped up recently as a result of the cultural deception that America has been spreading in the region. Many Muslims from among the elites and the masses have been influenced by this concept and endorsed it in its quality as an alternative to the military and tyrannical rule and as a reflection of the wishes of society. Others deemed it as the healing remedy to what is existent in society in terms of cultural, political, ethnic and religious plurality. They pitted the civil state against the “theocratic state” by which they mean the state that is based upon the theory of divine right or the “church-based state”. Then they attributed this to the state that is based upon the religion of Islam. They also mean by “civil state” the state that separates religion from life’s affairs.
This idea spread like wildfire in the milieux of the intellectuals and the politicians, and even some of the preachers. It became a coveted wish for them after the leaders of the popular intifadas in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Syria had called for it and the media machine propagated it intensively; the masses were deceived by it and they were indulgent in turning it into a slogan for the protests and demonstrations because their minds were engrossed in getting rid of the tyrants. Eventually, the Ummah became clad in the cloak of demanding the civil state and many lives were lost in return.
Some preachers would seek refuge in the concept of the “civil state” during their satellite TV interviews every time they were confronted with the contention that Islam rejected “the other” and would not endorse the presence of political organisations with thoughts contradictory to Islam; they thought that the notion of the “civil state” did not contradict Islam and that the Messenger of Allah (saw) established a “civil state” in Medina.
In fact, every terminology has a specific denotation; this is why the Kafir West endeavoured to deceive the Muslims about the real denotations of the terminologies and to conceal their contradiction to Islam. The “civil state” is the state that separates religion from life; in other words it is the state that discards religion, rejects its rules and prevents people’s transactions in society from being built upon its basis. The term “secular” is an adjective that refers to all of that which is not clerical, i.e. ecclesiastical. It refers to anything that is non-religious, i.e. worldly. The Western thought contains what is known as the “theocratic state”, namely the state that existed in the Middle Ages. It also contains the “civil state”, namely the state that separates religion from life. This means that the term “civil state” refers to the state that separates religion from life, which is the secular state. Hence, the process of removing the ecclesiastical attribute or authority is known as secularisation and the “civil state” is the state which is not dominated by religion and has no religious characteristic.
Therefore, what is meant by “civil state” is the state that separates religion from life; in other words, it is the secular state. Those who established this term use it as an antonym to the term “religious”.
As for the “theocratic state”, it is part of the ideas that cropped up in Europe in the Middle Ages. The theocracy was the state dominated by the clergy; it was described as a divine and sacred state that derived its authority from God. No one was allowed to account it because the view was that its orders were divine and not subject to debate. Europe experienced also the theory of the Divine Right of States, known also as the Divine Right of Kings. The tsars and the kings of Europe and Russia were using religion as a means to exploit the masses, transgress against them and suck their blood. The clergy were used as a tool for this. Consequently, a gruesome struggle erupted in which some philosophers and intellectuals went as far as denying religion altogether, while others acknowledged religion but called for its separation from life. Eventually, the opinion of the majority of philosophers and intellectuals settled on one single idea, namely the separation of religion from life, which resulted naturally in separating religion from the state.
Irrespective of whether the theocratic state came in the shape of “the state of the church” or in the shape of the Divine Right of Kings, in other words what existed in Europe in terms of the church dominance over all life’s affairs or what existed in terms of the divine right of the kings to rule through their control over the clergy, these two forms of rule reflected in a conspicuous manner the theocratic state that arose in Europe.
When we explore the reality of the “civil state”, we do so as opposed to the “theocratic state”; those who propagate the “civil state” today do so in the opposite sense of the “theocratic state”. Some of them resort to deception when they contrast it against the “military state” or the “declined state”, whereas in fact, the point at issue is the alienation of religion, namely Islam, from life.
The term “civil” does not denote progress or exaltedness; “civil” is a Western term that does not mean exalted or civic according to those who established it. It is neither the opposite of decline and corruption, nor the opposite of the village and the countryside, nor the opposite of military rule as some have imagined; it is merely the opposite of clerical authority.
Hence, the call for the “civil state” is the very call for secularism but under a new theme as part of “renewing secularism”.
The State in Islam is neither a “Civil State” nor a “Theocratic State”
Based on the aforementioned elucidation of the meaning of the “civil state” and the “theocratic state”, it transpires that this meaning does not apply to the Islamic State in any shape or form. The Islamic State has no relation whatsoever with the “civil state” or the “theocratic state”.
The Islamic State is not a “civil state” that separates religion from life, because it embraces Islam as the foundation of its existence and the basis of everything related to it.
It is also not a “theocratic state” in the spiritual priestly sense as there exists no similarity between the two states. in fact, they are contradictory to each other because the concept of the “spiritual theocratic state” stipulates that it is a sacred state that derives its authority from God and that no one is allowed to account it because its orders are divine and not subject to debate.
The Islamic State however is neither divine nor sacred; it derives its authority from the Ummah, because although sovereignty is to Shari’ah, the ruling and the authority belongs to the Ummah who confers them upon the State. The Khalifah of the Muslims executes the Shari’ah for which he is given the pledge of allegiance (Baya’ah) to rule by it. He is not a sacrosanct ruler because every Muslim reserves the right to account the State for its performance and although the commands of the Islamic State are Shari’ah rules adopted from the Islamic Fiqh (jurisprudence), whatever is deemed doubtful from the texts of their evidences or whatever its denotation is doubtful from among them is subject to debate; change and even annulment may be endorsed if conducted in sound manner of Ijtihad.
Hence, the State in Islam could not be described as a “civil state” because the denotation of the “civil state” is of one that separates religion from life. It could not also be described as a “theocratic state” because the “theocratic state” denotes a reality that is different to the State in Islam.
Does the State in Islam Resemble the Church’s Spiritual Authority?
In order to clarify this, it would be imperative to perceive the meaning of spirit in Islam. There is a huge contrast between the meaning of spirit in Islam and its meaning in the “religious spiritual state”
Spirit in Islam is man’s perception of his link with Allah; perceiving the link with Allah is what makes man undertake his actions in life according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah. Man is not composed of body and spirit; he is rather composed of matter and his actions are purely material. The spirit in man’s actions is reflected in perceiving the link with Allah when undertaking these actions.
As for the spirit with which the body lives, it is a secret that we know nothing about; Allah (swt) says: “They ask you about the spirit, say: “The spirit is a command from my Lord and of this you have been given but a little knowledge.”[TMQ 17.85]
When man conducts his actions in life according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah, this means he has perceived his link with Allah, thus he has blended matter (man’s actions) with the spirit (Allah’s commands and prohibitions); this is exactly the philosophy of Islam in life, namely blending matter with the spirit.
Therefore, man is not composed of something heavenly known as the spirit, and something worldly known as matter; the issue is not two things on the scales whereby man outweighs one against the other; there is merely one thing, namely matter, i.e. man and his actions in life.
Therefore, there is no spiritual priestly authority against a worldly temporal authority in Islam. Islam has rather come to combat these issues altogether; thus the priestly aspect is non-existent and it has no spiritual authority, i.e. there is no “theocratic state” in the Western clerical sense in Islam.
The State in Islam is Purely Islamic
The Islamic State is not a “civil state” in which Islam is separated from life nor is it a “theocratic state” as in the Western concept of priestliness. It is neither a spiritual authority based on the spirit outweighing the matter, nor a temporal authority based on the matter outweighing the spirit. It is rather a State whose function is to rule and is built upon a fixed doctrine and an intellectual leadership from which the systems of life emanate. The State executes these systems and enacts its elaborate rules with a sound manner of Ijtihad according to their texts and general principles. It is a State that has a specific civilisation that represents its method in life; it has an essential task and a fixed function for which it has come into being, namely to implement Islam and carry the Islamic Da’awah to mankind.
Hence, the basis upon which the Islamic State is built is the Islamic Aqeedah which is the message that it has to convey to the world to bring it out of the darkness of Kufr to the radiance of Islam.
The civilisation of the Islamic State or its method in life is characterised by three features:
1. The basis upon which it is built.
2. Its vision of life.
3. Its understanding of the definition of happiness.
The basis of the Islamic civilisation is the Islamic Aqeedah because the sources of its concepts about life emanate from the Qur’an and the prophetic Sunnah and because it relies on the rational deduction of all the concepts, be they opinions, thoughts or rules.
As for the Islamic civilisation’s vision of life, it combines the spiritual exaltedness and material progress because the Islamic civilisation visualises life as the blending of matter with spirit, i.e. subjecting man’s actions to the commands and prohibitions of Allah and consequently to the legislation that the State executes which man implements obediently and willingly in response to the command of Allah, not on the basis of expediency. This is the most magnificent vision because it makes life tranquil, dignified and comforting, and guarantees happiness to mankind by making sovereignty to Shari’ah pertinent to everyone. Shari’ah, for its part, aims to ideally shape society which attains the pinnacle of human perfection through its systems, laws and solutions to life’s problems. This vision makes man proceed according to Shari’ah constantly and willingly or compulsorily through the influence of the State.
The definition of happiness in the Islamic civilization is gaining the pleasure of Allah, because happiness in life is the highest ideal that man endeavours to achieve. This highest ideal should be unique and universal so that humanity may be steered towards it. It should also be permanent and unchanging lest it leads to instability and anxiety. It should also not be material but rather above materialism lest matter spoils and narrows it, only to end with an objective that leads to seeking another objective, thus turning the first one into a means to an end. This is because the highest ideal must be the ultimate objective with no other beyond it. Hence, the highest ideal in the Islamic civilisation is gaining the pleasure of Allah, not pleasing the conscience because the conscience or the emotion changes according to the motives and differs according to the moods. It also varies between individuals, since the conscience or emotion is a sensation emanating from the instincts and what shapes man’s concepts. The highest ideal is neither the good character nor satisfying of the body’s needs, nor anything else that may be susceptible to plurality, disparity or specification, or have the possibility of turning into a means to something else once it has been attained, after having been sought.
Therefore, the Islamic Aqeedah and the sovereignty of Shari’ah over man’s actions, embracing the highest ideal of gaining the pleasure of Allah as the ultimate objective and above matter, reflect the way of life in the Islamic State and her civilisation. The main task of the State and the function for which it came into being is to execute the ideology, i.e. the Aqeedah and the systems which emanate from it within its borders and to carry its message to the rest of the world as an intellectual leadership through the Da’awah coupled with the material force that protects the message and removes the physical obstacles that stand in its way.
These are the basic elements upon which the State is built. They are real components of the State which are absent in the “theocratic state” and fully exist in the Islamic State. This brings it into contradiction with the “theocratic state” and distances it from any spiritual trait in the priestly sense that suspends temporal life. Hence, it would be a major transgression to make a wide-ranging analogy between the Islamic State and the “theocratic state” that existed in the Middle Ages.
In order to clarify the disparity further, it would be imperative to address the denotation of the State in Islam.
The Islamic State
The State in Islam is an authority whose activity is confined to Shari’ah by its method to implement the rules of Shari’ah on the society it governs and to carry the Islamic Da’awah to the world. Hence, it is an executive entity for the set of concepts, criteria and convictions about life. The apparatus of the State is built upon seven pillars, namely the Khalifah (Head of State), the Assistants of the Head of State, the Shurah Council, the Administrative Section, the Governors (Walis), the Judiciary and the Army.
This apparatus was established by the Messenger of Allah (saw) in person. He used to assume ruling matters and manage people’s affairs in all aspects of life. Allah (swt) says: “We have revealed the Book to you with the truth to rule among people with what Allah has showed you.” [TMQ 4:105] The Messenger of Allah (saw) used to appoint a deputy to stand in for him in looking after people’s affairs whenever he left Medina on a military expedition. At the beginning of the twelfth month of the first year of Hijra, the Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed Saad Ibnu Ubadah before setting off for the expedition of al-Abwa’, and when he headed for Tabuk to fight the Romans, he (saw) appointed Mohammed Ibnu Maslama to deputise for him in Medina. Hence, the Messenger of Allah (saw), in his quality as Head of State, used to appoint someone to stand in for him in looking after people’s affairs whenever he left for an expedition. He (saw) appointed a number of assistants in ruling matters; he delegated Abu Bakr and Omar with general matters and Abu Bakr for his part delegated Omar and Abu Ubaydah, while Omar delegated Uthman and Ali. Hence, Abu Bakr and Omar where the two assistants of the Messenger of Allah (saw), Omar and Abu Ubaydah were assistants to Abu Bakr, and Uthman and Ali were assistants to Omar.
As for the administrative issues and the management of people’s affairs, the Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed a number of administrators who undertook such tasks and they were known as Kuttab (clerks). He (saw) appointed Zayd Ibnu Thabit – the scribe for revelation – as the correspondent for other rulers (kings); Mu’ayqib Ibnu Abi Fatima was the clerk of booty, al-Mughirah Ibnu Shu’bah was the clerk of loans and transactions and so on. Hence, the Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed a clerk for each department, i.e. a director for each department of administration.
As for the Walis, the Messenger of Allah (saw) appointed Utab Ibnu Usayd as Wali for Makkah with a salary of one Dirham a day. He also appointed Mu’ath Ibnu Jabal as Wali for Yemen, Zyad Ibnu Lubayd for Hadramout and al-Alaa’ Ibnul Hadrami for Bahrain.
As for the judiciary, the Messenger of Allah (saw) used to judge between people and settle their disputes. He used to dispatch the Walis and give some of them the competency of settling disputes. He (saw) appointed Utab Ibnu Usayd as Wali and judge for Makkah, and Muath Ibnu Jabal as Wali and judge for Yemen. Abu Bakr proceeded in the same manner and when Omar assumed the Khilafah, he confined the competencies of the Walis to ruling matters and made the judges independent of the Walis; he appointed Abul Darda’ as judge in Medina, Shurayh as judge in Basra and Abu Musa al-Asha’ri as judge in al-Kufa.
As for the armed forces, the Messenger of Allah (saw) turned all the Muslims into soldiers because Jihad is an obligation upon every Muslim. Whenever he (saw) wanted to initiate a raid, he would mobilise the Muslims and they used to go forth, equipped lightly or heavily, and perform Jihad with their bodies and their wealth for the sake of Allah. There was no regular army at the time and this was the case during the term of Abu Bakr until Omar took office and set up a regular army from among the Muslims, assigning a salary for them from the treasury of the State in return for being full-time soldiers. The rest of the Muslims were reservists who were mobilised whenever necessary.
As for the Shurah Council, the Messenger of Allah (saw) used to consult the Sahaba on various issues and he selected 14 men whose opinion was sought in Shurah-related matters. He (saw) did not choose them because they were the most competent and knowledgeable among the Sahaba, but because they were leaders of their folks, i.e. their representatives. Thus he chose seven from among the Ansar and seven from among the-Muhajireen, and they were only from among the leaders.
This is the apparatus of the State in Islam. It was occasioned by the Messenger of Allah (saw). It is distinguished in its form and foundations upon which it is built.
The Duty of the State in Islam
Although the State in Islam assumes the affairs of the community as a whole, it does not, however, assume the affairs of the individual unless he is unable to assume them himself, in which case, it would assist him and provide him with the means to fulfil his needs in his quality as a member of society. Society itself is composed of four elements, namely people, the thoughts, the emotions and the systems. People in society, with each individual, are an element of society, just like the thoughts, the emotions and the systems that bring those individuals together; the State is the deputy of society in executing Shari’ah from which those thoughts, emotions and systems emanate. Hence, the State exists to execute Shari’ah and it is responsible for this execution, just like the individual is in society.
The duty of the State is executed through power and authority, whereas the duty of the individual is executed in obedience to Allah and with the aim of gaining His pleasure. Every Muslim within the community, perceiving that he is responsible for the execution of Shari’ah pertinent to him with sheer piety as his motive, helps the State with what is pertinent to the community with regard to enjoining the good and forbidding the evil in response to the command of Allah.
Hence, the State neither relies on the rigour of legislation and the clout of the soldier in ruling matters, nor gives people the freedom to choose to implement Shari’ah, as long as they did not interfere with the freedom of others. The State rather relies on the piety that is ingrained in the hearts of people who abide by the commands of Allah and steer clear of His prohibitions. The State also relies on the justice of legislation and the clout of the soldier and cooperates with the Ummah in executing Shari’ah, because every Muslim realises that he is guarding a frontline of Islam and that he must not allow an incursion from his side. Hence, the whole of the Islamic Ummah is responsible for the execution of Allah’s rules, the rulers and the ruled, the guardian and the subjects, cooperating to ensure the full implementation of Islam. Despite the comprehensiveness of this responsibility and the necessity of this cooperation, the Islamic State is not the sum of the Ummah and the rulers, but rather the Khalifah to whom the Muslims have given their pledge of allegiance and the Assistants he has appointed to assist him and to manage people’s affairs.
The Competencies of the Head of State in Islam
Once the Muslims give the Baya’ah to their Khalifah, the Shari’ah rules that he adopts become implementable, i.e. they become law. He reserves the competency to execute Shari’ah; the Ummah has neither the right to approve nor the competency to execute the legislation. Indeed the authority belongs to the Ummah, but once she gives the Baya’ah to the Khalifah, this stipulates that she has delegated him to assume the authority on her behalf. He assumes ruling matters, i.e. he executes Shari’ah and the Ummah must monitor his actions, account him, deliberate with him and compel him to remove his Walis and Assistants if she disapproved of them.
The Ummah selects the Khalifah as Head of State and then she gives him a permanent Baya’ah that remains binding as long as he executes Shari’ah. He appoints his Assistants to share the burden of ruling with him at the helm overseeing their performance; he also appoints and supervises the Walis to govern the Wilayas. Additionally, he appoints the judges and the administrators for the various departments that attend to the affairs of the subjects. He appoints the commanders of the army and the emirs of its brigades, and he oversees their affairs personally. He also refers to the Shurah Council to seek their opinion in all the Muslims’ affairs, and he consults them in whatever he intends to undertake or relinquish.
The Principles of the Ruling System in Islam
The ruling system in Islam is built upon four principles; these are:
1. Sovereignty Belongs to Shari’ah, not to the People
According to Shari’ah, the individual does not conduct his own affairs as he pleases; the volition of the individual is rather conducted according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah. Likewise, the Ummah’s volition is conducted according to the commands and prohibitions of Allah and she does not conduct her affairs as she pleases. The proof for this is reflected in the saying of Allah (swt): “No by your Lord they shall not have true Iman until they make you judge in matters of dispute among them.” [TMQ 4-65], and also in the saying of the Messenger of Allah (saw): “None of you shall have Iman until his desire is in line with what I brought.” Hence, what controls the Ummah and the individual and what conducts the volition of the Ummah and the individual is what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought. The Ummah and the individual submit to Shari’ah. This is why sovereignty belongs to Shari’ah. Hence, the Khalifah is not given the Baya’ah by the Ummah in his quality as a hired employee, executing what she wants as is the case in the democratic system. The Khalifah is rather given the Baya’ah by the Ummah according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, to execute the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, i.e. to execute Shari’ah, not what people want.
2. Authority Belongs to the Ummah
Shari’ah has conferred the appointing of the Khalifah upon the Ummah and stipulated that the Khalifah assumes power through the Baya’ah. Evidence for the rule stipulating that the Khalifah is appointed by the Ummah is reflected in the Ahadith of the Baya’ah: Ubadah Ibnul Samit reported: “We pledged ourselves in complete obedience to the Messenger of Allah in wealth and woe.” Jarir Ibnu Abdullah reported: “I pledged allegiance to the prophet (saw) in complete obedience.” Abu Hurayra reported: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Allah shall neither look at three types of people on the Day of Judgment nor cleanse them of sin. They shall also endure grievous suffering. The first is one who has along the road water in excess of his needs, but refuses to give some of it to passersby. The second is one who gives his Baya’ah to an Imam only in the hope of receiving worldly gains: if he gets that, he is happy and if he is denied it, he is unhappy. The third is one who sets up his goods in the afternoon and swears by Allah that he has paid (or offered) for it so much.” Hence, the Baya’ah is given by the Muslims to the Khalifah, not by the Khalifah to the Muslims. They are the ones who give him the Baya’ah, i.e. appoint him as a ruler over them. The rightly-guided Khalifahs (al-Khulafa’ al-Rashidun) took the Baya’ah from the Ummah; they only became Khulafa’ through the Baya’ah given to them by the Ummah. The Ahadith of obedience and the Ahadith of the unity of the Khilafah act as proof that the Khalifah can only assume power through this Baya’ah. Abdullah Ibnu Amr Ibnul A’as reported that he had heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: “Whosoever pledges a Baya’ah to an Imam giving him the clasp of his hand and the fruit of his heart shall obey him as long as he can. If another comes to dispute with him, strike his neck.” Nafa’a also reported: “ Abdullah Ibnu Omar told me: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: “He who removes a hand of obedience he will meet Allah on the day of Judgement with no evidence in his favour, and whoever dies without a Baya’ah on his neck has died a death of Jahilyah.” Ibnu Abbas also reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Whoever sees something from his ruler which he dislikes let him be patient with him, for he who splits away from the authority by a hand span and then dies, dies a death of Jahilyah.” Abu Hurayra also reported: “The children of Israel used to be ruled and guided by prophets: Whenever a prophet died, another would take over his place. There will be no prophet after me, but there will be Khulafa’ who will be many in number.” People asked: “What do you order us then?” He said, “Fulfil your Baya’ah to them one after the other, then give them their due rights, for Allah will ask them about their ruling of those under their guardianship.” These Ahadith indicate that the Khalifah assumes power through this Baya’ah, since Allah has made obedience to him obligatory through the Baya’ah (…he who gives his Baya’ah to an Imam shall obey him…); thus he assumes the Khilafah through the Baya’ah and obeying him is obligatory because he is a Khalifah appointed by the Baya’ah. Hence, he takes the authority from the Ummah through the Baya’ah she gives him and on the basis of the obligation to obey the Khalifah she has given her Baya’ah to, i.e. the Khalifah for whom she has a Baya’ah on her neck. This proves that the authority belongs to the Ummah. Furthermore, the Messenger of Allah (saw) took the Baya’ah from people despite being a messenger. It was a Baya’ah for ruling and authority not a Baya’ah on the Prophethood. He took the Baya’ah from men and women but not from under-age children. Hence, since the Muslims are the ones who appoint the Khalifah and give him the Baya’ah according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and since the Khalifah assume power on the basis of this Baya’ah, this proves clearly that the authority belongs to the Ummah and she hands it to whoever she wishes.
3. Appointing One Single Head of State is Obligatory upon the Muslims
The obligation of appointing the Khalifah is established in the honourable Hadith. It is reported on the authority of Nafa’a that he said: “Abdullah Ibnu Omar told me: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) say: “He who removes a hand of obedience will meet Allah on the day of Judgement with no evidence in his favour, and whoever dies without a Baya’ah on his neck has died a death of Jahilyah.” The evidential aspect of this Hadith is reflected in the command given by the Messenger of Allah (saw) to every Muslim to have a Baya’ah to a Khalifah on his neck, though he (saw) did not order every Muslim to give a Baya’ah to the Khalifah. Thus the obligation is the presence of a Baya’ah on the neck of every Muslim, i.e. the presence of a Khalifah who deserves a Baya’ah from every Muslim. Thus it is the presence of the Khalifah that generates a Baya’ah on the neck of every Muslim, irrespective of whether the Muslim gave this Baya’ah physically to him or not. The evidence for the presence of one single Khalifah is reflected in the Hadith reported by Abu Saeed al-Khudri, quoting the Messenger of Allah (saw) as saying: “If the Baya’ah were given to two Khalifahs, kill the latter of them.” This indicates clearly that the Muslims are prohibited from having more than one single Khalifah.
4. The Head of State Reserves the Exclusive Right to Adopt the Shari’ah Rules
The Head of State enacts the constitution and the various laws. It was established through the Ijma’a (general consensus) of the Sahaba that the Khalifah reserves the exclusive competency to adopt the rules. Based on this Ijma’a, the following celebrated Shari’ah principles were established:
a. The opinion of the Imam removes the disputes.
b. The order of the Imam is binding.
c. The Sultan reserves the right to generate judgements according to arising problems.
This is the reality of the ruling system in Islam; it is distinct from the currently known systems from its foundations and its basics, though some of its aspects may be similar to those systems.
Hence, the Islamic ruling system differs in its nature and essence from all the other ruling systems of the world.
It is not monarchy and does not endorse the monarchy system because it does not give the Head of State any rights other than those given to every individual of the Ummah, and it does not make the Head of State a proprietor, but rather an implementer of Allah’s Shari’ah and a deputy of the Ummah in authority. He is not a symbol of the Ummah who reigns but does not rule; he rather rules on her behalf without possessing anything of this authority. Succession to the throne is also non-existent and abhorred in the Islamic ruling system.
It is not a republican system because the presidency of the state is not determined by a fixed term of office, but rather by the implementation of Shari’ah. Hence, the Head of State remains in office as long as he is implementing Shari’ah, irrespective of the duration of his term. If he contravened Shari’ah, his ruling term would end even if it were one single day or one single hour. The Islamic ruling system contradicts the republican system from the basis upon which it is built. The basis of the republican system stipulates that sovereignty belongs to the people, whereas the Islamic system stipulates that sovereignty belongs to Shari’ah, not the people.
The ruling system in Islam is not a federal system whereby its provinces are separated by self-rule and only united by the general federal rule. It is rather a system of unity whereby Marrakesh in the West and Khurasan in the East are just like the governorate of al-Fayoum if the capital of the Islamic State was Cairo. The financing of the Wilayas as a whole is one and the expenditure is one; these are spent on the interests of all the subjects, irrespective of the Wilayas.
The Islamic State Is Not a Democratic State
Democracy means, according to its founders “the rule of the people by the people”. It is the people who choose the ruler, enact the laws and settle the disputes between the individuals. Hence, they generated the notion stipulating that people are the source of authority. It is the people who appoint the rulers, draft the constitution, enact the laws, account the rulers and appoint the judges to settle disputes between individuals on the one hand and between people and the state on the other. This reality contradicts Islam in categorical manner.
As for drafting the constitution and enacting the laws, the constitution and the laws in Islam are but Shari’ah rules deduced from the elaborate evidences. Every article of the constitution and every law is a Shari’ah rule. In fact, when Shari’ah ordered the adoption of solutions for life’s affairs, namely the Shari’ah rules, it restricted the adoption to what emanates from the Aqeedah and it linked it to Iman, thus making the taking of other than what emanates from the Aqeedah as taking from the Taghut.
As for the appointment of rulers by the people, the reality of democracy contradicts Islam because although the ruler is chosen by the people in the democratic system, the effective rulers are those with huge capital. They are the ones who bring the rulers into power, not the people. On the other hand, when the people choose the ruler, it is on the basis that he is an employee. In Islam however, the Ummah chooses the ruler and the Baya’ah is what makes the ruler a ruler who executes Shari’ah and adheres to it. He is not an employee of the Ummah and he does not execute her volition. He is rather a guardian of her interests according to Shari’ah. Hence, the ruler in Islam is not a hired employee of the Ummah, but rather her deputy in the implementation of Shari’ah.
As for the notion of people being the source of the judicial authority, this is nothing but a deception; because although people choose the ruler and appoint him, it is he, the ruler, who chooses those who assume the judiciary on his behalf. The people do not choose the judges and they do not have the competency to remove them; all this is rather in the hands of the ruler.
Hence, it would be wrong to describe the Islamic State as a democratic state because the concept of democracy contradicts Islam, thus it would be that it is from Islam when Islam has nothing to do with it whatsoever.
Human Rights
As for the notion of human rights, it emanates from the doctrine of separating religion from life, namely the doctrine of the Kafir West. This notion contradicts Islam because when they laid down those rights, they failed to adhere to what Islam has brought; this failure is even noticeable in the first instance. Some of the texts of these rights contradict the rule of Islam, such as the right of expression, the right to change religion, the right to change the creed and the right of personal freedom. This entails the permissibility of expressing opinion in an absolute manner even if this amounted to calling for Kufr, destroying the Aqeedah and relinquishing the religion, or calling for wrongdoing, lewdness, decadence and permissiveness among the Muslims. These rights have also permitted apostasy from Islam under the pretext of freedom of belief. They have also endorsed adultery and illicit relationships under the guise of preserving the right of the individual to exercise his personal freedom. This amounts to a flagrant contradiction of Islam, since the Muslim is restricted in all his actions to the rules of Shari’ah; he is not free in the sense that the West suggests, but rather a servant of Allah who adheres to the commands and prohibitions, which he is not allowed to violate.
The Human Rights they propagate and turn into a sword brandished against the masses and other states are all linked to the Western viewpoint towards life and to the Western historic experience. In fact, the Human Rights Declaration itself is nothing but a cultural, political and legal Western product. The West’s attempt to globalise these rights is deemed as one of the aspects of their endeavour to spread their civilisation and to shape the world according to their concepts, while claiming that they reflect the loftiest civilised expression the world has ever witnessed. The paradox is that whilst the Kafir West was laying down the foundations of Human Rights at the end of the 19th century, be it in America, France or Britain, the period of the Western colonisation of people and nations was reaching its peak. The founders of those rights perpetrated the most repugnant of crimes against humanity in America, Africa and Asia.
The attempts at seeking human rights in Islam and at reconciling them with what the West propose’s amounts to an attempt to harmonise Islam with Kufr and to follow their method of research and thinking. This leads us to embrace their personality and visualise human problems and their solutions through the lens of their presentation, whereas our religion makes it inevitable for us to identify the duties and the rights of man through our Islamic Aqeedah, not through those who hide behind the call for human rights with a blood-stained history and a progress fraught with oppression and enslavement of people who were stripped of everything, even of the right to live, in order to achieves their egoistic interests.
Political Pluralism
The notion of political pluralism is also a Western notion that emerged from the Capitalists’ viewpoint towards society. Society, according to them, is comprised of individuals with various creeds, opinions, interests, origins and needs. Hence, they deem it imperative to have various factions in society; each faction has its own aims, which must be represented by either a party or a movement or an organisation, each of which must be recognised and allowed to partake in the political process.
Political pluralism means man is free to embrace any idea and call for it within a system that separates religion from the state and life. A pluralistic society does not only endorse apostasy from Islam, it also gives the apostates the right to call for their apostasy and for everything that Islam prohibits. It is a society that endorses the presence of political parties that call for the doctrines of Kufr, headed by the doctrine of separating religion from life, and other parties based on the call for what Allah has made unlawful, such as the call for patriotism and nationalism, i.e. chauvinism, which Islam has described as putrid. Pluralism also endorses the propagation of sexual perversity, abnormality and debauchery of women – nothing is prohibited in pluralism. Hence, the Muslims’ endorsement of pluralism amounts to endorsing the call of Kufr in their countries and to endorse the call for everything that Allah has prohibited.
Islam has prohibited the Western concept of political pluralism but it has sanctioned the multiplicity of political parties on the basis of the Islamic Aqeedah. Allah (swt) says: “Let there arise from among you a band of people calling for the goodness, enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil; and those are the ones to attain felicity.” [TMQ 3:104]. This ayah contains a command, which has come in the imperative form, to form a group. The ayah has not confined the request to one single group since the word “one” was not mentioned after the word “group”, it rather came as an indefinite noun denoting generality. Allah (swt) says: “And your Lord is One Lord.” [TMQ 2: 163]; had the ayah not restricted the word “lord”, the expression would have denoted the multiplicity of deities. Hence, the fact that the word “group” in the ayah has come in the indefinite form proves that the multiplicity of groups and parties is allowed within the Islamic Ummah. However, the ayah has restricted the persons who should form a group; the phrase “from among you” in the verse prohibits the group or the party from being formed by other than the Muslims and confines it exclusively to the Muslims. The work of the groups is also restricted to two activities, namely calling to the Khair (goodness) i.e. to Islam, on the one hand, and enjoining the Maroof (good) and forbidding the Munkar (evil) on the other which includes accounting the ruler.
That which Does not Contradict Islam or that which Agrees with Islam is not from Islam
In the form of a justification for the endorsing of the thoughts America is calling for, especially democracy, the “civil state” and the like, certain preachers claim that these thoughts agree with Islam or at least do not contradict it. Hence, it is imperative to expound the reality of the error of this justification and the aberration of this idea that these preachers are calling for and attributing to Islam, either through ignorance or deception, by demonstrating that what does not contradict Islam and what agrees with Islam are not from Islam.
Islam is what has come through revelation from Allah; in other words, it is what has come in the Book and the Sunnah, and what the Book and the Sunnah have guided to in terms of evidence. This alone is Islam; anything else is Kufr, irrespective of whether it agreed with Islam or contradicted it. The proof for this is reflected in the fact that Allah (swt) has commanded us to take what the Messenger has ordered and to abstain from what he has prohibited. He (swt) has also commanded us to refer in judgement to the Messenger of Allah (saw), i.e. to what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought. Allah (swt) says: “So take whatever the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves whatever he withholds from you.” [TMQ 59:7]. This text denoting the obligation to take what the Messenger has brought and to relinquish what he has prohibited; so if this ayah is associated with another ayah in which Allah (swt) says: “Then let those beware who withstand the Messenger’s order, lest some trial befall them, or a grievous penalty be inflicted on them”[24:63], knowing that the wordings of “whatever the Messenger assigns” and “whatever he withholds” denote generality, it becomes clear that it is obligatory to take what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought and to forsake what he has prohibited, and that it includes everything he (saw) commanded and everything he (saw) prohibited. The request in this ayah is decisive and denotes obligation; the evidence for this is reflected in the warning that Allah (swt) directs at those who violate His command, namely that a severe punishment would be awaiting them. Allah (swt) also says: “But no, by your Lord, they can have no Iman, until they make you judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decisions, but accept them with the fullest conviction.” [TMQ 4:65] In this ayah, Allah (swt) denies belief to those who refer in judgment to other than the Messenger (saw) in their actions, which indicates clearly that judgement should be exclusively sought from what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought and that it is forbidden to seek it from other than what he has brought. All this indicates clearly that it is obligatory to adhere solely to what Islam has brought.
Furthermore, Allah (swt) has conspicuously forbidden the Muslims from taking anything from other than what the revelation has brought from Allah. He (swt) has severely reprimanded those who seek judgement from other than what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has come with. Allah (swt) says: “Have you not turned your vision to those who declare that they believe in the revelations that have come to you and to those before you? Their wish is to resort together for judgment to the Taghut (Evil), though they were ordered to reject it. But Satan’s wish is to lead them astray far away.”[4:60] This ayah clearly forbids the seeking of judgement from other than what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought; it describes such an act as aberration because it is a judgement sought from Taghut (evil). There are also several Ahadith which demonstrate clearly that the Halal is what Allah has made lawful and the Haram is what Allah has made unlawful. This means that whatever Allah has not made lawful cannot be deemed as such and whatever Allah has not forbidden cannot be deemed as Haram; this means it must not be taken. It is reported on the authority of Salman al-Farisi who said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) was asked about ghee, cheese and fur, so he said: “The Halal is that which Allah has made Halal in his Book, and the Haram is that which Allah has made Haram in his Book.” Al-Darqutni also extracted from the Hadith of AbiTha’alaba that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Indeed Allah has imposed obligations, so do not squander them and He has laid down limits, so do not transgress them.” This clearly proves that we are forbidden from transgressing what Allah (swt) has determined for us, thus it would be wrong to take from other than what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought.
Besides, the Shari’ah rule is the address of the Legislator pertaining to the actions of the servants, and the Muslims are commanded to refer in their actions to the address of the Legislator and to conduct their affairs according to it. If they took what does not contradict it or what agrees with it, they would be taking other than the Shari’ah rule, because they would not be taking the very Shari’ah rule, but what agrees with it or what is similar to it, i.e. what does not clash with it; in both cases they would not be taking the Shari’ah rule itself but something else. Anything other than the Shari’ah rule is not the Shari’ah rule, irrespective of whether it contradicted it or otherwise, agreed with it or otherwise. Their taking would not be a taking of the Shari’ah rule. Thus, it would be forbidden to take other than what Islam has brought, irrespective of whether it agreed with Islam or not and irrespective of whether it contradicted Islam or not. Furthermore, in addition to being commanded to take what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has ordered and to refrain from what he has prohibited, which denotes the prohibition of taking anything else, the proscription has come in a conspicuous manner to refrain from taking anything the Messenger of Allah (saw) has not brought, i.e. from taking anything other than what the Messenger of Allah (saw) has brought. This is corroborated by a host of lucid Ahadith, such the Hadith reported on the authority of Aisha (ra) who said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: Anything brought about into our teaching which is not part of it, is a reject.” In another narration, Aisha (ra) reported that the Messenger of Allah (saw) had said: “He who performs an action not based on our order, his action is a reject.” Al-Bukhari reported on the authority of Abu Hurayra (ra) that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “The Hour will not begin until my Ummah follows in the footsteps of those who came before it, handspan by handspan, cubit by cubit.” It was asked, “O Messenger of Allah, like the Persians and Romans?” He said, “Who else but those people?” Al-Bukhari reported also on the authority of Abu Saeed al-Khudri that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “You will certainly follow the ways of those who came before you, handspan by handspan, cubit by cubit, until even if they entered the hole of a lizard, you will do so too.” We asked, “O Messenger of Allah, do you mean the Jews and the Christians?” He said, “Who else?”
These texts are explicit in prohibiting the taking from others. The first Hadith says “It is a reject” and the other two include the denotation of prohibition. Hence, taking the Western laws amounts to taking from other than Islam; it is a following of those like the Persians, the Romans, the Christians and the Jews. It is a following of the British, the French and the Americans among others. Hence, taking such laws is forbidden, irrespective of whether such laws agreed with Islam or not, and irrespective of whether such laws contradicted Islam or not. Taking them is simply Haram.
The US-Required Reforms and the “Civil State”
Prior to proposing the Greater Middle East Initiative, America had demanded a host of reforms from the regimes of the region in order to bring about the so-called “civil state”. The substance of those reforms evolved around loosening the ruling regimes’ grip on the subdued masses, enabling the people of the region to partake in governing themselves, introducing changes to the constitutions and laws, amending the education curricula, enabling women to attain a higher status in public life, undertaking reforms in the economic policy and fighting financial and administrative corruption.
If one were to ponder over what America has demanded from the regimes, he would be led to believe that she is on the side of the masses and that she supports them in their quest to gain what is envisaged as their right. In fact, America has demanded what she refers to as reforms in order to gain the pleasure of the masses, so that they may in turn carry the thoughts that she wants to establish, which would secure her unilateral dominion this century. America would not have undertaken such a manoeuvre had it not been for the sake of securing her interests and serving her aims.
What America is calling for in terms of reforms is in fact simply designed to corrupt and deceive the Ummah. The regimes in the Muslims’ lands must be uprooted rather than reformed. Changing the regime does not merely involve changing the individuals in charge; rather, the real change entails the basis upon which those regimes are built. Hence, the bona fide remedy is to end the secular basis upon which the current regimes are built and to replace it with the Islamic Aqeedah, which would be the foundation of the state in its quality as the Aqeedah of the Ummah, who would not revive save upon its basis.
The constitutions in the Muslims’ countries have been portrayed as being set in stone for the Ummah, needing only some minor amendments. In fact, they are but constitutions of Kufr; so are the civil laws. Hence, the call for the amendment of the constitutions and the substitution of certain laws is in fact deceptive and tendentious.
As for the amendment of the educational curricula, most of the educational policies have been shaped to serve the Western thought and the programmes have been established to specifically achieve this purpose, especially in the cultural subjects.
As for the fight against financial and administrative corruption, it should target the soil that produces corruption and rears corrupt individuals; in other words, the basis upon which life is built in society must be changed. So is America serving anything but her own interests by calling for what she refers to as reforms, in order to establish the so-called “civil state”?
A few years ago, the executive director of the Washington Institute, Robert Satloff, gave counsel in the shape of a memorandum to Karen Hughes, former Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs; to quote from the memorandum: “Banish the terms “Arab world” and “Muslim world” from America’s diplomatic lexicon; be as country-specific as possible, in both word and deed. Radical Islamists want to erase borders and create a supranational world where the lines of demarcation run between the “house of Islam” and the “house of war.” Don’t cede the battlefield to them without a fight.”
This is how they plot and plan and this is how they determine their aims and execute their policies on the basis of what they plan. So do those who plan to reform the regimes of the Muslims’ countries harbour any goodwill for them?
The New American Religion
America has launched a fierce intellectual campaign in order to carve in stone what she refers to as “moderate Islam” which accommodates the so-called “civil state”, i.e. “the democratic civil Islam” that she has devised and has been working to make it the new religion for the people of the region.
The most prominent thought of this new religion is the endorsement of the idea of democracy which means the rule of the people by the people. However, America sneaked this idea through on the grounds that it was the freedom of the people to choose their ruler; thus a number of preachers embraced it and set about claiming that democracy emanated from the nucleus of Islam. Consequently, “democracy” became an Islamic idea and the call for it did not contradict Islam but agreed with it.
Another major thought of this new religion is that of human rights. Just like she did with the idea of democracy, America introduced the idea of human rights to Islam under the pretext that Islam has safeguarded all the rights of humankind, such as the right to life, the right to education, the right to work, the right to voice his opinion and the like. Thus, we have ended up with many individuals calling for the idea of “human rights”; we have even ended up with some individuals attempting to establish it as part of the foundations of Shari’ah. Those individuals either forgot or chose to forget that some of the major thoughts of human rights that America is propagating is the right of man to choose his religion, the right to express his opinion, the right to the freedom of ownership and the right to personal freedom. Such thoughts represent the core of the notion of “human rights”, which America is propagating in the Muslims’ countries. These thoughts contradict Islam in a categorical manner.
Political pluralism is also part of the thoughts of this new religion. According to this pluralism to which America is calling, it is permitted to establish parties and movements that call for Kufr doctrines, such as the doctrine of separating religion from life, or that are built on a basis that Islam prohibits such as the nationalist and patriotic parties. It is also permitted to establish movements that call to what Allah has forbidden, such as sexual perversity and fornication, or establish pressure groups that defend the legitimisation of gambling, intoxicants and debauchery.
Dear Muslims
The Kafir West and those smitten by its culture from among the educated and intellectuals, as well as some of the “preachers” influenced by its civilisation, are working towards diluting Islam and present it to people as being the “moderate Islam”, the “non-intransigent or extremist”. Here is America working towards misleading the Islamic Ummah with democracy and her Western thoughts in the hope of infusing them in the minds of the Muslims as the substitutes for the sound perception of Islam. The calls of America should have been met with categorical rejection because America would not call for an idea unless her interests were at stake, and if this idea clashed with her interests, she would tread on it and discount it. We witnessed this clearly in her war on Iraq and Afghanistan; we saw how America trod on the values and ideals to which she herself had been calling. However, for the intellectual despondency among certain preachers to reach the point where they shroud the American thoughts with the cloak of Islam and they set about calling for these thoughts energetically in the visual and aural media, as well as the press. And for those preachers to consider such thoughts as the saviour of society, which would give each individual his rights, this amounts to the mother of all deceptions and the real threat that must be confronted.
America has devised her plans for our region and the rest of the world and she has determined the objectives, the roles and the tools; she has even settled the fundamental plane of the battle in our region, namely “the battle of hearts and minds”.
Therefore, the decision-makers and the executive bodies devoted their full attention to diverting the convictions among the Ummah about the necessity to maintain Islam in its unadulterated image, away from her practical life. This was conspicuously reflected in the discarding of the Islamic slogans from what has been dubbed as the Arab revolutions.
The youths of the Ummah were exhorted to carry the concepts of the Kafir West, such as democracy, the civil state and the like, after they had been duped into believing that they did not contradict Islam. The concepts and the slogans were wittingly packaged in a manner that gave the impression that they had been chosen by the masses; thus, the energy of the youths and their passion were exploited to salvage their Ummah from the tyranny of those who had been appointed by the Kuffar to rule over her and trample on her dignity, to make them sacrifice their lives for the sake of what they imagined was the salvation of the Ummah by hoisting the slogans that call for the “civil state” and democracy. America threw the heads of her former slaves from among the tyrants after she had snubbed them and turned them into precious trophies in exchange for the Ummah’s embracing of the slogans of Kufr such as democracy and the “civil state”. All of this while the masses remained oblivious to the sobering thought that should follow the joy of getting rid of those criminal murderers.
The Americans have resorted to devious styles to exploit the energies of the Ummah’s youths and prepare the elite from among them to lead the sincere masses, who yearn for breaking free from the shackles of the criminal tyrants. Former US Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed Congress’s Foreign Affairs Committee seven years ago about a number of initiatives aimed at generating contact with the youths of the region through exchange programmes with the emphasis on the young men and women who did not belong to the elites or to the traditionalists. He also talked about radio and television broadcasting in order to encourage free press and to assist the listeners and the viewers in the Middle East in acquainting themselves with various thoughts. During his visit to Cairo, he also spoke about the existence of a new dimension in President George Bush’s agenda for the Middle East region. He ended his visit with a press conference in which he said that the nature of that dimension was related to introducing changes to the region by the year 2013.
The Islamic Ummah ought to realise that she is a nation with a message that Allah has honoured her with its conveying to mankind to bring them out of the darkness of Kufr and into the radiance of Islam, and that she ought to lead this universe to bring it out of the misery it is enduring due to the absence of the sublime Islam and to salvage it from the shackles of America whose idea for the Middle East region (Greater Middle East Initiative) was summed up by one of her senior political thinkerss Noam Chomsky; he said: “The central lesson of World Order is: “What we say goes; we are the masters, you shine our shoes, and don’t ever forget it.”
Finally, it is high time our Ummah raised the banner of Islam; it is high time she restored her glory and dignity, and assumed her position of leadership among other nations once she has got rid of all the deceptions with which she has been embroiled by her enemies. Our Ummah will not remain mortgaged to the Kafir America and the West; the first undertaking she will perform is to snub the alien thoughts that were designed to turn into convictions that steer her behaviour in life. This will be achieved when every Muslim become aware that he stands on one of the battlefronts of Islam and that he should not allow anything to penetrate from his side.
In order to illustrate the shape of the Islamic State in a more conspicuous manner in the minds of the Muslims so that they may resume their lives on its basis, we make available to the Muslims the articles of the constitution which have been deduced from the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of His Messenger and to that which they guide in terms of Ijma’a of the Companions and Qiyas.
The Draft Constitution
General Rules
Article 1 – The Islamic Aqeedah constitutes the foundation of the state. Hence, nothing is permitted to exist within its entity, apparatus, accountability or within any other aspect connected to it, unless it is based on the Islamic Aqeedah. At the same time, it acts as the basis of the constitution and Shari’ah canons whereby nothing related to either of them is permitted to exist unless it emanates from the Islamic Aqeedah.
Article 2 – The Head of State adopts a host of specific Shari’ah rules, which he will enact as a constitution and as canons. If he adopts a Shari’ah rule, this rule alone becomes the Shari’ah rule that must be acted upon. Also, it becomes a binding law that every single citizen must overtly and covertly abide by.
Article 3 – The Head of State neither adopts any specific Shari’ah rule in matters related to rituals, except in Zakat and Jihad, nor does he adopt any thought from among the thoughts related to the Islamic Aqeedah.
Article 4 – All those who hold the Islamic citizenship enjoy the rights and the duties as stipulated by Shari’ah.
Article 5 – It is not allowed for the State to discriminate between the citizens either in terms of ruling or judiciary matters, or management of their affairs or anything similar. Every individual should be treated equally regardless of race, religion, colour or anything else.
Article 6 – The State implements the Islamic Shari’ah upon all those who hold the Islamic citizenship, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, as follows:
A – All the laws of Islam shall be implemented upon the Muslims without any exception;
B – The non-Muslims shall not be interfered with regarding what they believe in and what they worship;
C – The law of apostasy shall be implemented upon the apostates from Islam if they themselves were the apostates. As for their children, they shall be treated as non-Muslims if they are born as such, in accordance with their current status as being either polytheists or people of the book;
D – Non-Muslims shall be treated in matters related to foodstuffs and clothing according to their faith and within the scope of what the Shari’ah rules permit;
E – Matters of marriage and divorce will be settled among the non-Muslims according to their faith, and will be settled between them and the Muslims according to the rules of Islam;
F- The State shall implement the remainder of the Shari’ah rules and all the Islamic Shari’ah matters, such as transactions, penal codes, testimonies, ruling systems and economics among others, equally upon the Muslims and the non-Muslims; the State shall also implement the same upon the Covenantors, the asylum seekers and all those under the authority of Islam in the same way it implements them upon the citizens, except for the ambassadors, consuls, envoys and the like, who shall be treated according to the agreements concluded with their respective states;
Article 7 – Arabic is the exclusive language of Islam and the exclusive official language of the State;
Article 8 – Ijtihad is a duty of sufficiency and every Muslim reserves the right to practise it provided he meets all its prerequisites;
Article 9 – All the Muslims shall shoulder the responsibility of Islam. There is no clergy in Islam and the State should prohibit any sign of its presence among the Muslims;
Article 10 – Conveying the Islamic Da’wah shall be the foremost function of the State;
Article 11 – The only acknowledged evidences of the Shari’ah rules shall be the Book, the Sunnah, the Ijma’a (consensus) of the Sahaba and al-Qiyas (analogy). It shall be prohibited to derive legislation from other than these evidences;
Article 12 – In essence, one is presumed innocent. No one should be punished without a court ruling. It is absolutely forbidden to torture anyone and whoever does this shall be castigated;
Article 13 – Actions are in essence subject to abidance by the Shari’ah rule. Hence, no action shall be undertaken unless its rule is identified. Things are in principle Mubah (permitted) as long as there is no evidence stipulating prohibition;
Article 14 – The means to Haram would be Haram if it fulfilled two matters: a- When it leads inevitably to Haram without fail; b- When the action involved is prohibited by Shari’ah;
Article 15 – The ruling system shall be a unitary and not a federal system.
The Ruling System
Article 16 – The rule shall be central and the administration shall be decentralised.
Article 17 – Ruling and any function deemed as part of the ruling shall only be assumed by a fair, Muslim freeman.
Article 18 – Accounting the rulers shall be one of the rights of the Muslims and one of their duties of sufficiency. Non-Muslims reserve the right to express their opinions on grievances they may suffer at the hands of the ruler or on any flaws in the implementation of Islam upon them.
Article 19 – The Muslims reserve the right to establish political parties to account the rulers or to attain power via the Ummah, provided such parties are based on the Islamic Aqeedah and the rules they adopt are Shari’ah rules. Establishing parties does not require permission and any party not based on Islam shall be prohibited.
Article 20 – The ruling system is based on four principles:
1. Sovereignty belongs to Shari’ah and not to the people.
2. Authority belongs to the Ummah.
3. Appointing one single head of state is obligatory upon the Muslims.
4. The head of state reserves the exclusive right to adopt the Shari’ah rules. He shall enact the constitution and all the laws.
Article 21 – The apparatus of the state is built upon seven pillars:
1. The Head of State
2. The Assistants
3. The Walis
4. The Judges
5. The Administrative Apparatus
6. The Armed Forces
7. The Shurah Council
The Shurah Council
Article 22 – The individuals who represent the Muslims’ mainstream opinion and whom the Head of State consults are the Shurah Council. Non-Muslims are permitted to be members of the Shurah Council to lodge a complaint against the rulers’ injustice or their maladministration of Islam upon them.
Article 23 – The Member of the Shurah Council shall be selected by universal suffrage.
Article 24 – Membership of the Shurah Council shall be open to all mature, sane, Muslim and non-Muslim citizens, men and women alike; non-Muslim membership shall be confined to lodging complaints against any unfair treatment that might be perpetrated by the rulers or against the maladministration of Islam.
Article 25 – Al-Shurah is the seeking of opinions in a general manner, whereas al-Mashura (recommendation) is the seeking of a binding opinion. Hence, legislation, definitions, intellectual matters, such as the revealing of facts and the technical and scientific matters do not form part of al-Mashura; all other types of opinions come under al-Mashura.
Article 26 – Al-Shurah is the exclusive right of the Muslims. Non-Muslims have no right in Al-Shurah. As for the expressing of opinion, this is permitted for all the subjects, Muslims and non-Muslims alike.
Article 27 – Matters that fall under al-Shurah and yet are of al-Mashura type shall be subject to the opinion of the majority, regardless of whether the opinion is sound or erroneous. Any other matters that come under al-Shurah, soundness should be sought; majority and minority opinions shall be irrelevant.
Article 28 – The Shurah Council has four Competencies:
1.
a. Any matter that falls under what agrees with the term “al-Mashura” in respect of domestic matters must be subject to the opinion of the Shurah Council, such as government matters, education, health, economy and the like. The opinion of the Shurah Council is binding. The Shurah Council’s opinion must not be sought in all that does not fall under what agrees with the term “al-Mashura”; thus the Council’s opinion must not be sought in foreign policy, finance and military matters.
b. The Shurah Council reserves the right to account all the actions that effectively take place within the State, whether these were related to domestic or foreign or financial or military matters, and its opinion is binding in all matters where binding majority opinion is applicable, and it is not binding in all matters where non-binding majority opinion is applicable. If the Shurah Council and the rulers differed about an action from a Shari’ah aspect, the matter is referred to the Court of Mathalim.
2. The Shurah Council reserves the right to voice dissatisfaction with the Walis or the Assistants; its opinion in such matter shall be binding; thus the Khalifah should remove them at once.
3. The Khalifah refers to the Shurah Council the rules he intends to adopt in the Constitution and the laws. The Muslims members of the Shurah Council reserve the right to debate these rules and give their opinion. Their opinion in such matters is not binding.
4. The Muslims from among the Shurah Council’s members reserve the right to short-list the candidates for the post of Khilafah and their opinion in this matter is binding; thus the candidature of those not nominated by the Shurah Council will not be accepted.
The Head of State
Article 29 – The Head of State deputises the Ummah in authority and in the execution of Shari’ah.
Article 30 – The post of Head of State is a contract based on mutual consent and free choice. No one shall be compelled to accept it and no one shall be compelled to select a particular nominee for the post.
Article 31 – Every mature and sane Muslim, man or woman, reserves the right to partake in electing the Head of State and in giving him the Bay’ah. Non-Muslims shall have no right to partake in this process.
Article 32 – Once the contract for the post of Head of State has been concluded through the Bay’ah of those lawfully eligible to conclude it, the Bay’ah of the remaining Muslims shall henceforth be a Bay’ah of obedience and not a contractual one. All those who may be prone to rebellion shall be compelled to give their Bay’ah.
Article 33 – No one shall assume the post of Head of State unless the Muslims appoint him. No one shall acquire the competencies of the Head of State save through a legitimate contract, as is the case with any contract in Islam.
Article 34 – The province or the country that gives the Head of State a contractual Bay’ah must be autonomous with its power in the hands of the Muslims to the exclusion of any Kufr state. The domestic and foreign security of the Muslims in that country must be based on Islam and not Kufr. The Bay’ah of obedience from other countries need not meet such requirements.
Article 35 – The candidate for the post of Head of State should only fulfil the requirements of the contract; he need not fulfil the conditions of preference, since the precept lies in the requirements of contract.
Article 36 – The candidate for the post of Head of State must fulfil six conditions before the post is contracted to him. He must be male, Muslim, free, mature, sane and just.
Article 37 – If the Head of State dies, resigns or gets removed, a new Head of State must be appointed within three days of the post becoming vacant.
Article 38 – The method of appointing the Head of State is as follows:
a – The Muslim members of the Shurah Council shall shortlist the candidates for the post and their names shall be announced. The Muslims shall then be invited to elect one of them;
b – The results of the election shall be announced and the Muslims will know the candidate who wins the majority of the votes;
c- The Muslims shall hasten to give their Bay’ah to the winner of the election to assume the post of Head of State and to work according to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw);
d – Once the Baya’ah has been concluded, the name of the Head of State, together with the credentials making him worthy of the post, shall be made public so that the news of his appointment reaches the entire Ummah.
Article 39 – The Ummah reserves the exclusive right to appoint the Head of State; however, she has no right to remove him once the contractual Bay’ah has been concluded according to Shari’ah.
Article 40 – The Head of State is effectively the State; thus he enjoys all the competencies belonging to the State. His competencies are as follows:
a- He reserves the right to make that which he adopts from the Shari’ah rules binding canons that must be obeyed and cannot be contradicted;
b- He is responsible for the domestic and foreign policy. He assumes the supreme command of the armed forces and he reserves the right to declare war, to effectuate peace, truce and all treaties;
c- He reserves the right to accept or reject the credentials of foreign ambassadors, and to appoint and remove the Muslim ambassadors;
d- He reserves the right to appoint and remove the Assistants and Walis. They shall all be answerable to him and to the Shurah Council;
e- He reserves the right to appoint and dismiss the supreme judge, the heads of departments and the army’s commanders and emirs of brigades. They shall all be answerable to him and to the Shurah Council;
f- He reserves the right to adopt the Shari’ah rules on the basis of which the state’s budget is devised, to ratify the sections of the budget and to determine the funds required for each section, be it in respect of the revenues of the expenditures.
Article 41 – The Head of State is confined in his adoptions to the Shari’ah rules. He shall be forbidden to adopt a rule that has not been soundly deduced from the Shari’ah evidences. He shall be restricted to what he adopts in terms of rules and to what he has committed himself in respect of the method of deduction. Thus, he shall not be allowed to contradict any Shari’ah rule deduced according to a method contradicting the method he has already adopted, and he shall not be allowed to issue an order contradicting the rules he has adopted.
Article 42 – The Head of State reserves the absolute right to manage the subjects’ affairs according to his opinion and his Ijtihad. He is, however, prohibited from contradicting any Shari’ah rule under the pretext of expediency. For instance, he shall not prevent any citizen from importing commodities under the pretext of protecting domestic industry, or resort to imposing price ceilings under the pretext of curbing exploitation, or compel homeowners to let their properties under the pretext of easing housing shortage. He shall not undertake any action that contradicts the rules of Shari’ah; he shall not prohibit any Mubah or permit any Haram.
Article 43 – The tenure of the Head of State is not fixed; he shall remain in office as long as he upholds Shari’ah and executes its rules, and as long as he is capable of shouldering the duties of governance and provided his situation does change in a manner that makes him unfit for the post; should such a change occur, he must be removed at once.
Article 44 – The instances that render the Head of State unfit for the post are three:
a- If one of the Head of State’s contractual conditions are breached, such as apostasy, flagrant moral depravity, insanity and the like, because such instances impact on the conditions of contract and its continuity;
b- If the Head of State becomes unable to shoulder the burdens of ruling for whatever reason;
c- If the Head of State becomes constrained and incapable of governing the affairs of the Muslims according to his opinion and within the boundaries of Shari’ah. If he becomes constrained by any force to the extent that he is no longer able to manage the affairs of the governed according to his opinion and within the boundaries of Shari’ah, he will become practically incapable of shouldering the duties of governance and unfit for the post of Head of State; this is envisaged in two instances:
1 – If one or several individuals from among his entourage wield control over executive matters. If the possibility existed, he would be given the chance to rid himself of their control, otherwise he shall be removed immediately;
2 – If he effectively falls captive in the hands of an overwhelming enemy, or under his control. If the possibility of his rescue exists, he shall remain in office until the possibility is exhausted, otherwise he shall be removed immediately.
Article 45- Mahkamat-ul-Madhalim (The Court of Unjust Acts) reserves the exclusive right to determine whether the Head of State is fit for office or otherwise; it also reserves the exclusive competence to remove or caution the Head of State.
The Assistants
Article 46 – The Head of State appoints Assistants to shoulder the burdens of ruling. He delegates to them the authority to manage and effectuate people’s affairs according to their opinions and Ijtihad.
Article 47 – The Assistant must fulfil the same requisites stipulated for the post of Khalifah, viz., male, Muslim, free, mature, sane and fair. Additionally, he must be competent in the tasks he is deputised to undertake.
Article 48 – The appointment to the post of Assistant shall fulfil two features, namely general competency and deputation. Hence, The Head of State shall explicitly address him by saying: “I have delegated to you my competencies to administer them on my behalf”, or words to that effect, which denote general competency and deputation. Unless the appointment is conducted in this manner, the appointee cannot be deemed an Assistant and he cannot enjoy the competencies of Assistant.
Article 49 – The function of the Assistant is to keep the Head of State informed of all what he undertakes in terms of the governing of affairs and of all what he executes in terms of deputation and appointments, lest he becomes similar to the Head of State in his competencies. Hence, his function is to report his activities and execute them if the Head of State does not put a stop to them.
Article 50 – The Head of State shall observe the actions of the Assistant and his management of affairs, so that he may approve what is sound and rectify what is flawed; this is because running the affairs of the Ummah is the liability of the Head of State and must be according to his own Ijtihad.
Article 51 – Once the Assistant has administered a matter with the consent of the Head of State, he reserves the right to execute it as directed by the Head of State without any amendment. Should the Head of State review a matter and raise an objection to its execution, the opinion of the Assistant would be enacted if what he had executed in terms of rules was sound or what he had spent in terms of funds was fair, because in the first instance, it would be the opinion of the Head of State; and the Head of State must not reverse rules he has already implemented and funds he has already spent. However, if the Assistant implemented another matter, such as appointing a Wali or equipping a task force, the Head of State would in this case reserve the right to object and to overrule the decision of the Assistant. This is because the Head of State reserves the right to reverse his own decisions in such cases and hence those of the Assistant.
Article 52 – The Assistants shall not be assigned to a single department or to a specific task, because the nature of their appointment is general; they shall also not undertake administrative matters; they shall rather have a general supervision of the administrative apparatus.
The Administrative Apparatus
Article 53 – The administrative apparatus is divided into two departments: The Executive Department and the Services Department. They are both non-ruling apparatuses and they are staffed by salaried non-ruling employees.
Article 54 – The Executive Department is responsible for implementing the guidelines from the Head of State to the domestic and foreign bodies, and referring to him what is issued by those bodies. It is an intermediary department between the Head of State and other bodies, executing on his behalf and referring back to him.
Article 55 – The Head of the Executive Department must be Muslim, because he is an intimate subordinate of the Head of State.
Article 56 – The Executive Department shall be headed by one person. The Department may however be managed by several persons if each is assigned a specific task. It shall be directly connected to the Head of State just like the Assistants. The director of the Executive Department is an Executive Assistant but not a ruler.
Article 57 – The Services Department oversees the affairs of the people living under the authority of the State. Each service shall be headed by a director who will be directly responsible for its running. The directors shall have the competency to appoint, transfer, discipline and dismiss their employees according to the administrative rules. Those employees shall be accountable to their heads of services in terms of their work, and accountable to the Head of State, the Assistants and the Walis (Governors) in terms of abiding by the rules and general orders.
Article 58 – The policy of the Services Department is built on simplicity in administration, the velocity of execution and the competence of the directors.
Article 59 – Every competent citizen, man or woman, Muslim or non Muslim, is eligible to be a director or an employee of any of the Services.
Article 60 – The Directors of the Administrative Apparatus as a whole shall not be dismissed save for valid reasons according to the administrative rules. They could however be transferred from one post to another according to their senior officials’ opinion.
The Walis
Article 61 – The lands under the authority of the State shall be divided into Wilayas. Each Wilaya shall be divided into units and each shall be called Amalah. The person assuming the Wilaya shall be known as the Wali or Amir, and the person assuming the Amalah shall be known as the Amil or the governor.
Article 62 – The Walis and the Amils shall be appointed by the Head of State; the latter may however be appointed by the Walis if they are delegated the powers to do so. The Walis and the Amils shall fulfil the same requirements stipulated for the post of Assistant; thus they must be mature and fair Muslim freemen, and they must be competent in their assigned job. They shall be selected from among the pious and authoritative men.
Article 63 – The Wali shall be conferred the competency to rule and to oversee the activities within his Wilaya on behalf of the Head of State. Hence, he shall have within his Wilaya all the competencies conferred upon the Assistant within the State, namely the governance over all the subjects of his Wilaya and the supervision of all matters related to it, save for the finance, the judiciary and the armed forces. The police force shall be placed under his governance in respect of the execution but not the administration.
Article 64 – The Wali shall not be required to keep the Head of State posted in respect of the actions he undertakes within the stipulations of his mandate. If a new and unprecedented matter arises, he shall notify the Head of State and act according to his instructions. If he deems that a delay might be disadvantageous, he shall undertake the action and inform the Head of State consequently, explaining the reasons behind executing the matter prior to informing him.
Article 65 – Each Wilaya shall establish an elected committee headed by the Wali. This committee shall be conferred the competency to voice its opinion in administrative matters, but not in ruling matters. The opinion of the committee is non-binding on the Wali.
Article 66 – The term of the Wali must not be lengthy. The Wali shall be relieved of his post whenever it is sensed that he is powerfully settled or that people are awestruck by him.
Article 67 – The Wali shall not be transferred from one Wilaya to another because his appointment is general over a specific location. He may however be relieved of his post and subsequently reappointed.
Article 68 – The Wali shall be relieved of his post if the Head of State deems fit; or if the Shurah Council expresses its disapproval, justified or otherwise, of his performance; or if the majority of the local residents express their resentment towards him. His removal shall be effectuated by the Head of State.
Article 69 – The Head of State shall monitor the undertakings of the Walis and maintain a vigilant watch over their activities. He shall appoint deputies to review their situations and investigate their conducts. He shall periodically gather all or some of them and listen to the subjects’ grievances against them.
The Judiciary
Article 70 – The Judiciary is defined as communicating the rule by way of compulsion. It settles all the disputes that may arise between people. It also prohibits whatever may be deemed harmful to the public interest and settles the differences between the masses and any person within the ruling system, be it rulers or employees or Head of State or his subordinates.
Article 71 – The Head of State shall appoint a Supreme Judge from among the mature, wise, Muslim freemen. The Supreme Judge shall be from the people of Fiqh. He shall be conferred the mandate to appoint, discipline and remove the judges according to the administrative systems. The rest of the courts’ employees shall be affiliated to the director of the department in charge of administering the affairs of the courts.
Article 72 – The Judges are of three types: The Qadi who assumes the settling of disputes between people in terms of transactions and penalties, the Muhtasib who assumes the settling of breaches that harm the public interest, and the Qadi of Mathalim who assumes the removing of disputes between people and the State.
Article 73 – The person assuming the Judiciary must be a free, mature, wise, just, Muslim scholar who is perceptive to applying the rules to their respective realities. He who assumes the Judiciary of Mathalim should in addition to these conditions be a man and a Mujtahid.
Article 74 – It is permitted to appoint the Qadi and the Muhtasib in a general manner to preside as judge over all the cases throughout the whole country; and it is also permitted to appoint them in a specific manner with regard to the area or the types of the Judiciary. As for the Qadi of Mathalim, he can only be appointed in a general manner in terms of the Judiciary. As for the area, it is permitted to appoint him over all the country or in a specific area.
Article 75 – It is forbidden for the Judiciary Court to be formed of more than one single Qadi with the competence to pass judgement. It is permitted to have one or more Qadi sitting with him, but they shall not have the competence to pass judgement; they shall only have a consultative role and can only voice an opinion. Their opinion is however not binding upon the Qadi.
Article 76 – It shall be forbidden for the Qadi to pass judgement except in a Judiciary court. The evidence and the oath shall only be taken into consideration if given in a courtroom.
Article 77 – It is permitted to have different categories of courts according to the types of cases. Hence, it is permitted to assign certain Qadis to specific cases to a certain extent, and to assign other cases to other courts.
Article 78 – There are no appeal courts and no courts of cassation. With regard to sentencing, the Judiciary is but one single category. If the Qadi passes judgement, his judgement is irrevocable and no other judgement could ever quash it.
Article 79 – Al- Muhtasib is the Qadi who looks into all cases that are of public concern in which there are no plaintiffs, provided these cases are not Hudud (penal) or Jinayat (criminal).
Article 80 – Al-Muhtasib reserves the right to pass instant sentences on infringements of the law in any place and without the need to hold court. A police force shall be at his disposal to execute his orders and implement his rulings immediately.
Article 81 – Al-Muhtasib reserves the right to appoint deputies from among those who fulfil the requirements of al-Muhtasib, and to assign them to various areas. These deputies shall have the mandate to undertake the task of al-Hisbah in the area or the locality assigned to them and over the cases delegated to them.
Article 82 – The Qadi of al-Mathalim is appointed to lift every Mathlamah (grievance) inflicted upon any person living under the authority of the State, whether he is a citizen of the State or not, and whether the Mathlamah occurs from the Head of State or those below him from among the rulers and employees.
Article 83 – The Qadi of al-Mathalim is appointed by the Head of State or by the Supreme Judge; however, neither the Head of State nor the Supreme Judge have the right to remove him in case he is implicated in a Mathlamah or a complaint.
Article 84 – The post of Qadi al-Mathalim is not confined to one single person or a specific number of Qadis. The Head of State reserves the right to appoint a number of Qadis to tackle al-Mathalim according to requirement, irrespective of their number. However, when assuming the Judiciary, the competence of judging is only given to one single Qadi. It is permitted for other Qadis of al-Mathalim to sit with him during the proceedings, but they shall only have a consultative role and the Qadi is not obliged to seek their opinion.
Article 85 – The court of al-Mathalim reserves the right to remove any ruler or any civil servant; it also reserves the right to remove the Head of State.
Article 86 – The Court of al-Mathalim reserves the right to look into any Mathlamah, be it related to individuals from the State’s apparatus, or related to the Head of State’s violation of Shari’ah rules, or related to the denotation of a text of legislation in the constitution, law and all the Shari’ah rules, within the adoption of the Head of State, or related to the imposition of a tax and the like.
Article 87 – It is not necessary in the Judiciary of al-Mathalim to hold court, or to summon the defendant, or to have a plaintiff. It rather reserves the right to look into the Mathlamah even if no one lodges a complaint.
Article 88 – Every person reserves the right to delegate, in complaint or in defence, whomsoever he wishes, be it a Muslim or non Muslim, man or woman. In this there is no difference between the agent and the client. The client can delegate an agent for a wage and the wage becomes due upon the client by mutual agreement.
Article 89 – It is permitted for a person with mandates of any function, be it specific such as the guardian or the tutor, or general such as the Head of State, the ruler, the employee, or the Qadi of Mathalim and the Muhtasib, to appoint, within the scope of his mandates, an agent to act in lieu of him in disputes and in defence only, in his quality as a guardian, or a tutor, or Head of State, or a ruler, or an employee, or a Qadi of Mathalim or a Muhtasib, regardless of whether he is a plaintiff or a defendant.
The Armed Forces
Article 90 – Jihad is an obligation upon the Muslims. Military training is compulsory. Every Muslim man reaching the age of 15 must undergo military training in preparation for Jihad. Conscription is however a sufficiency-based duty.
Article 91 – The armed forces are divided into two groups: The Reserve Force consisting of all the Muslims fit for mobilisation and the Regular Force consisting of full-time soldiers whose salaries are, like all employees, funded by the State’s budget.
Article 92 – The Armed forces are one single unit, which is the army, of which Special Forces shall be selected, organised and given a specific culture to form the police force.
Article 93 – The police force is assigned the task of maintaining law and order, overseeing domestic security and undertaking all executive aspects.
Article 94 – The armed forces shall have streamers and banners. The Head of State shall hand the streamer over to whom he appoints as commander; as for the banners, they shall be presented by the commanders.
Article 95 – The Head of State is the Commander-in-Chief of the army. He shall appoint the Chief of Staff, an Emir for each division and a commander for each brigade. The remaining ranks of the army of the army shall be appointed by the Emirs and the commanders. The officers of the general staff shall be appointed based on their military culture by the Chief of Staff.
Article 96 – The armed forces shall be one single army located in specific camps. However, some of these camps must be set up in various Wilayas and some others in the strategic location. Some camps must remain permanently mobile and act as an assault force. The camps shall be organised in numerous groups, each one of which shall either be given a number as a name, such as the first army, the third army for instance, or it can be named after a Wilaya or Amalah.
Article 97 – It is of the essence to provide the army with the highest possible standard of military education and to elevate its intellectual level as far as possible. Every member in the army shall be nurtured by the Islamic culture that enables him to have at least an overall awareness about Islam.
Article 98 – Each camp shall be manned with an adequate number of officers of the general staff who have acquired a high level of military knowledge and experience in devising plans and directing battles. The army should by and large be supplemented with as many officers of the general staff as possible.
Article 99 – It is of the essence to afford the army with all the requisite armaments, supplies and equipment so as to fulfil its task in its quality as an Islamic army.
The Social System
Article 100 – The principal function of a woman is that of a mother and housewife. She is an honour that must be protected.
Article 101 – Men and women must in essence be segregated from each other. They should not meet together except for a Shari’ah-approved requisite such as trading and Hajj.
Article 102 – Women shall be entitled to the same rights as those bestowed upon men and shoulder the same duties as those imposed upon men, except for those specified by the Shari’ah evidences to be exclusive to either of them. Hence, a woman has the right to engage in business, farming, and industry, to take on contracts and transactions, to own all types of property, to invest her funds herself or through others and to conduct all of life’s affairs by herself.
Article 103 – It is permitted for a woman to work in the civil service and in the Judiciary, except the Court of al-Mathalim. A woman shall have the right to vote for the members of the Shurah Council and to be a member of the Council. She shall also have the right to elect the Head of State and give him the Baya’ah.
Article 104 – It is not permitted for a woman to assume the ruling. She cannot be Head of State or a judge on the court of Mathalim or a Wali or a Amil, and she cannot assume any function deemed as part of ruling matters.
Article 105 – A woman lives in a public realm and a private one. It is permitted for her in the public realm to live with other women and with men who are her Maharim, i.e. those forbidden to her in marriage; she can also live among foreign men, i.e. whom she can marry, provided nothing of her body is exposed, apart from her face and hands, and the clothing is not revealing nor her charms displayed. She is not allowed within the private realm to live except with other women or her male Maharim; and she is not allowed to live together with the foreign men. In both cases, she must abide by all the Shari’ah rules.
Article 106 – Meetings in private spaces with foreign persons (Khulwah) shall be forbidden. Dazzling display and exposing of body before foreign persons shall be prohibited.
Article 107 – Men and women shall be forbidden from assuming any work that poses a threat to morals or causes corruption in society, such as hiring a woman as air hostess for instance, with the aim of exploiting men’s sexual inclinations, or hiring an attractive young man to work in hairdressing saloons or restaurants.
Article 108 – Married life is one of serenity and marital relationship is one of companionship. The protection the husband offers his wife is one of guardianship and not dominion. A wife shall obey her husband and he shall meet her living costs according to the decorous standard of living.
Article 109 – Married couples shall cooperate fully in performing the household duties. The husband shall undertake all the duties usually performed outside of the house, with the woman undertaking those normally performed indoors as best as she can. The husband should provide home-help as required to assist with the household tasks she cannot manage herself.
Article 110 – The custody of children shall be the duty of the mother and her right, whether Muslim or not, as long as the child is in need of care. When the children, girls or boys, are no longer in need of care, they shall be made to choose which parent they wish to live with, whether the child is male or female. If only one of the parents is Muslim the child shall have no choice but to join the Muslim parent.
The Economic System
Article 111 – The economic policy is the perspective on how society must be shaped when addressing the issue of satisfying people’s needs. Thus, how society must be shaped shall be made the basis for satisfying people’s needs.
Article 112 – The economic issue is about distributing the funds and the services to all the State’s subjects and about enabling them to benefit from these funds and services by making them accessible and helping everyone strive to acquire them.
Article 113 – The State shall guarantee the inclusive fulfilment of every single subject’s basic needs. It shall also guarantee the accessibility for each individual to fulfil their luxurious needs to the highest standard possible.
Article 114 – The wealth belongs exclusively to Allah, who has bequeathed it unto man; consequently man has acquired the right to own this wealth. It is Allah who has permitted man to acquire this wealth; thus man has become the effective owner of this wealth thanks to this permission.
Article 115 – Property is three types: private property, public property and state property.
Article 116 – Private property is a Shari’ah rule determined by the substance or the benefit, and it necessitates enabling the acquirer to benefit from it and receive a return for it.
Article 117 – Public property is the leave of the Legislator bestowed upon the community to benefit from the matter.
Article 118 – Every fund, the disposal of which is subject to the opinion and Ijtihad of the Head of State, such as taxes, Kharaj and Jizyah, shall be deemed as State property.
Article 119 – Private property consists of the movable and immovable assets that are subject to the following five Shari’ah provisos:
1- Work
2- Inheritance
3- Money needed for survival
4- State handouts
5- Gifts and donations
Article 120 – The disposal of assets shall be subject to the leave of the Legislator, be it in spending or developing. Thus, prodigality, improvidence and stinting shall be prohibited. Capitalist companies, cooperative associations and all transactions contradicting Shari’ah shall be banned. Usury, exorbitance, monopolising and gambling and the like.
Article 121 – The Ushr lands are the Arabic Peninsula and the lands of the people who accepted Islam; the Kharaj lands are those conquered either peacefully or through war, except the Arabic Peninsula. Individuals own the tenure and the utility of Ushr lands. The tenure of the Kharaj lands shall remain the property of the State; individuals may however own the utility of the lands. Every individual shall reserve the right to exchange the Ushr lands, as well as the utility of the Kharaj lands through legitimate contract. They shall also be subject to inheritance just like any other asset.
Article 122 – Barren lands may be owned by way of rehabilitation or enclosure. Other lands may only be owned through legitimate reasons, such as inheritance, purchase or feudalism.
Article 123 – Land rental for farming shall be categorically prohibited, be it Ushr or Kharaj land; land-leasing shall also be prohibited. As for share-cropping, it is unrestrictedly permitted.
Article 124 – Every landowner shall be compelled to farm his land. Grants shall be given from the treasury to those who need them to farm their lands. Anyone leaving their lands uncultivated for three years shall have their lands confiscated and given to others.
Article 125 – Public property is determined by three matters:
a- All that which is part of the communal spaces such the cities’ squares.
b- The inexhaustible minerals such as oil wells.
c- Areas whose nature prevents private ownership such as rivers.
Article 126 – Factories may in principle be owned by individuals. However, the ownership of a factory depends on the substance it manufactures; thus, if the substance were part of what may be privately owned, the factory could be a private property, such as a textile factory. If the substance were part of the public properties, the factory would have to be a public property, such as the steel factories.
Article 127 – The State shall not turn a private property into a public property, since public property is determined by the nature and the attribute of the resource and is not subject to the State’s opinion.
Article 128 – Every member of the Ummah shall be entitled to benefit from all what is deemed public property. The State shall not allow any individual to own or exploit any public property to the exclusion of others.
Article 129 – The State reserves the right to protect parts of the barren lands and that which is part of the public property if it deems this in the common interest of the subjects.
Article 130 – The hoarding of wealth shall be forbidden, even if its Zakat is paid.
Article 131 – Zakat shall be levied from the Muslims; it shall only be taken from the properties that Shari’ah has determined, such as cash, commercial goods, cattle and cereals. Zakat shall be taken from every owner, be it a liable person, such as the sane and mature, or the non-liable, such as the child and the insane. Zakat shall be paid to one or more of the eight categories mentioned in the noble Qur’an.
Article 132 – Al-Jizyah shall be levied from the Thimmis (covenantors). It shall only be imposed on the mature men who can afford it, and not on women and children.
Article 133 – Kharaj tax shall be levied on the Kharaj lands according to bearing capacities; as for the Ushari lands, their due Zakat shall be levied on the actual produce.
Article 134 – The Shari’ah-approved taxes shall be levied from the Muslims to cover the expenses of the treasury, provided they are levied from what is surplus to the needs of the taxpayer, and in moderation; and provided the needs of the State are taken into consideration. No tax whatsoever, apart from the Jizyah, shall be levied from non-Muslims.
Article 135 – The State reserves the right to levy taxes from the Ummah to undertake all the duties imposed upon her by Shari’ah if the treasury does not have sufficient funds. The State however shall not impose any tax to fund projects or cover expenditure whose financing is not binding on the Ummah. It shall be forbidden for the State to collect court fees or administration fees and the like.
Article 136 – The State budget has a host of fixed titles determined by Shari’ah rules. As for the sections of the budget and the funds assigned for each section, as well as the issues for which these funds are allocated, they shall be decided according to the opinion and Ijtihad of the Head of State.
Article 137 – The permanent revenues of the treasury are: the spoils, the Jizyah, the Kharaj, a fifth of the buried treasure and Zakat. All these revenues shall be perpetually collected, whether there is a need for them or not.
Article 138 – If the permanent revenues of the treasury do not cover the expenditure of the State, taxes shall be levied from the Muslims. The State shall proceed in levying taxes in the following manner:
a- To cover the expenditures that are binding on the treasury, such as grants for the poor, the needy and the wayfarer, and to fulfil the duty of Jihad.
b- To cover the expenditure that is binding on the treasury by way of remuneration, such as the salaries of the civil servants and the soldiers, and the reimbursements of the rulers.
c- To pay for the binding expenditures related to public utilities and amenities, such as building roads, extracting water and building mosques, schools and hospitals.
d- To cover emergency expenditures arising from natural disasters such as famine, floods and earthquakes.
Article 139 – Customs levied at the frontiers of the State, and income derived from public and state properties, and from those leaving no heirs behind, are all part of the treasury’s revenues.
Article 140 – The expenditure of the treasury is divided into six categories:
a – The eight categories of individuals eligible for Zakat shall be remunerated from the Zakat fund. If funds are lacking, they shall not receive any money.
b – The poor, the needy, the wayfarers, the Mujahedeen and the debtors would be remunerated from the permanent revenues of the treasury if the Zakat fund were short of the cash. If the permanent revenues were insufficient, the debtors would not receive any money. As for the poor, the needy, the wayfarers and the Mujahedeen, taxes shall be levied to meet their subsistence needs; the State may borrow for this purpose to prevent them from falling victim to corruption.
c – State employees such as civil servants and soldiers shall be remunerated by the treasury. Taxes would be immediately levied to meet their expenses if the treasury funds were insufficient; loans shall be raised if it is feared they may fall victim to corruption.
d – Essential services and utilities such as roads, mosques, hospitals and schools shall be funded by the treasury. Taxes shall be immediately levied to cover their expenditure if funds are insufficient.
e – Non-essential services and utilities shall be funded by the treasury. If the expenditures could not be met, they shall not be funded and consequently, they would be postponed.
f – Emergency expenditures to deal with disasters such as earthquakes and floods shall be covered by the treasury; if there are insufficient funds available, loans shall be raised immediately; the loans shall be repaid later from levied taxes.
Article 141 – The State shall guarantee employment for all its subjects.
Article 142 – People working for individuals or companies shall have the same rights and duties as State employees. Any person working for a wage is considered an employee, irrespective of the nature of the work or the worker. If the employer and the employee were to have a dispute over pay,it shall be settled according to the market average salary; if they differed about another issue, it shall be settled according to the employment contract, within the boundaries of Shari’ah.
Article 143 – The salary may be determined according to the effectiveness of the work or the employee, and neither according to the knowledge of the employee nor his qualifications. There shall be no annual increments for employees; they shall rather be paid the full value of the salary they deserve, be it for the work they perform or for their competence.
Article 144 – The State shall guarantee the subsistence of the destitute and the unemployed who have no legal guardians to provide for them. The State shall also provide shelter for the elderly and the disabled.
Article 145 – The State shall endeavour to circulate wealth among all the subjects and to prevent its circulation among a specific section of society.
Article 146 – The State shall undertake to enable each individual citizen to fulfil his luxury needs, and to generate equilibrium in society in the following manner:
a – The State shall grant its subjects either fixed or liquid assets from its treasury funds, and from the booty and the like.
b – The State shall donate plots of lands to those who do not have ample land. Landowners who fail to exploit their lands shall not be considered. Farmers unable to cultivate their lands shall be granted farming aid.
c – The State shall offer financial assistance from the Zakat funds and the booty and the like to those who are unable to settle their debts.
d – The State shall dispense from the revenues of the public properties to the needy and the well-to-do according to what it deems appropriate to help the subjects fulfil their luxurious needs and to generate equilibrium.
Article 147 – The State shall oversee agricultural affairs and their products according to the exigencies of the agricultural policy, so as to exploit the land to its highest production level.
Article 148 – The State shall oversee all industrial affairs and it shall directly take on all public-property-related industries.
Article 149 – Foreign trade shall be assessed according to the citizenship of the trader rather than the origin of the goods. Belligerent traders shall be prohibited from conducting business in our lands, unless a special licence to the trader or the goods is granted. Traders from countries that have treaties with the State are treated according to the terms of the treaties. Traders who are subjects of the State shall be prohibited from exporting goods needed by the State or deemed as strategic; they however shall not be prohibited from importing any goods they own.
Article 150 – All the subjects of the State reserve the right to establish scientific laboratories related to all aspects of life. The State shall also endeavour to establish such laboratories.
Article 151 – Private individuals shall be prohibited from owning laboratories producing substances that may cause harm to the Ummah or the State and whose prohibition is stipulated by Shari’ah.
Article 152 – The State shall provide free healthcare to all the subjects; yet it shall neither prohibit private consultations of doctors nor trading in medicines.
Article 153 – Developing and investing foreign capital in the country shall be forbidden. Granting concessions to foreigners shall also be forbidden.
Article 154 – The State shall issue its own independent currency; linking it to any foreign currency shall be forbidden.
Article 155 – The currency of the State shall be confined to gold and silver, minted or otherwise. No other form of currency shall be permitted. The State reserves the right to issue coins in other than gold and silver provided the treasury maintains the equivalent amount in gold and silver in its reserves. Hence, the State may issue brass, bronze, banknotes and the like, provided they are entirely covered by gold and silver.
Article 156 – Setting up private banks shall be categorically prohibited. Only the State’s bank shall be operative and all usurious transactions shall be forbidden. The State’s bank shall be a department of the treasury and it shall lend money and facilitate financial and monetary transactions according to the Shari’ah rules.
Article 157 – Exchange between the State’s currency and currencies of other states shall be permitted, just like the exchange between the State’s own coinage. It shall be acceptable for the exchange rate between two currencies to differ provided the currencies are different and provided the exchange is carried out simultaneously in a hand-to-hand manner. The exchange rate may fluctuate without any restrictions provided it is between two different currencies. All subjects may purchase any currency they require from within or outside the State and they can spend it without the need of permission or the like.
The Education Policy
Article 158 – The Islamic Aqeedah shall be the basis upon which the education curricula are built. Hence, the teaching material and the teaching methods as a whole shall be designed in a manner preventing any deviation in education from this basis.
Article 159 – The education policy’s objective shall be to develop the Islamic mentality and the Islamic disposition; thus each entire subject shall be designed on the basis of this policy.
Article 160 – The objective of education is to generate the Islamic personality and provide people with the sciences and knowledge related to life’s affairs. Hence, the teaching methods shall be designed in a manner that achieves this objective and prevents any departure from it.
Article 16 – It is imperative to draw a distinction between the empirical sciences and what is related to them, such as mathematics on the one hand, and the cultural sciences, on the other. The empirical sciences, and all that is related to them, shall be taught according to requirement and shall not be confined to any stage of education. As for the cultural sciences, these shall be taught at the primary and secondary levels according to a specific policy that conforms to the thoughts and rules of Islam. However, these cultural sciences are studied like other sciences in higher education, provided they do not lead to a departure from the State’s education policy and objective.
Article 162 – The Islamic culture must be taught at all levels of education. Branches of various Islamic disciplines should be made available in higher education, in addition to medicine, engineering, natural sciences and the like.
Article 163 – The arts and the industries may be associated with science in one aspect such as commercial arts, navigation and agriculture; and may be taken without any restrictions or conditions in such cases. The may be associated with culture when they are influenced by a specific viewpoint, such as painting and sculpting. Hence, they shall not be taken if they contradict Islam’s viewpoint.
Article 164 – Only the State’s educational programme shall be taught to the exclusion of all others. Private schools are allowed to operate provided they are not foreign and they adhere to the State’s curriculum, and provided they are established on the State’s educational programme and they fulfil the education policy and objective.
Article 165 – Providing free education to every individual, be they male or female, to help acquire the necessary knowledge to proceed in the realm of life, shall be the duty of the State in the primary and secondary levels. The State shall endeavour to the best of its ability, to provide free higher education for everyone.
Article 166 – Public libraries, laboratories and various other means of developing knowledge shall be made available by the State in other than schools and universities for all those who wish to pursue research in all fields of knowledge such as Fiqh, Usul al-Fiqh, Hadith and Tafseer; in addition to thought, medicine, engineering, chemistry, inventions, discoveries and the like, in order to generate within the Ummah an abundant number of Mujtahideen, authors and inventors.
Article 167 – The exploitation of writing for educational purposes shall be prohibited at all levels; no individual, author or otherwise, shall monopolise the copyrights once the book is printed and published. However, if the book is still an idea which is yet to be printed and published, the intellectual property owner reserves the right to take payment for selling the idea to the public the same way he takes payment for teaching.
Article 168 – Every individual subject reserves the right to publish a newspaper or a magazine, political or otherwise, and to publish any book without prior permission. Any individual printing or publishing or issuing any material deemed as damaging to the foundation upon which the State is built shall be punished.
Article 169 – The State shall work towards eradicating illiteracy and shall endeavour to educate those who have missed out on school education.
The Foreign Policy
Article 170 – Politics is looking after the domestic and external affairs of the Ummah. It is undertaken by the State and by the Ummah. The State shall assume this task practically and the Ummah shall account the State for its performance.
Article 171 – It shall be categorically forbidden for any individual or party or bloc or group to be linked in any shape or form to any foreign state. International relations are the exclusive competency of the State, since it reserves the right to look after the affairs of the Ummah in a practical manner. The function of the Ummah and the blocs shall be to hold the State accountable in respect of these foreign relations.
Article 172 – The end does not justify the means; because the method and the idea are of the same type. Thus Wajib and Mubah must not be attained through Haram means; likewise, the political means must not contradict the method of politics.
Article 173 – Political manoeuvres are imperative in foreign policy. Their efficacy lies in expounding the acts and concealing the aims.
Article 174 – The most important political styles include boldness in exposing state crimes, highlighting the threats of crooked policies, divulging evil conspiracies and obliterating illusory personalities.
Article 175 – Projecting the prominence of the Islamic thoughts in terms of looking after the affairs of individuals, nations and states is deemed as one of the best political methods.
Article 176 – The political cause of the Ummah is to uphold Islam reflected in the might of its State’s personality, the excellence of implementing its rules and the assiduous conveying of its message to the world.
Article 177 – Islam is the axis around which foreign policy evolves and upon which the State’s relations with all the other states is built.
Article 178 – The relationship of the State with the existing states of the world is built on four considerations:
a – The states existing in the Islamic world are deemed to be within the sphere of one land; thus, they are not part of foreign affairs. Relations with these states are not considered to be in the realm of foreign policy and their subjects are not treated as foreigners; they shall enjoy the same rights as any individual subject of the State if their household is a household of Islam. If their household is a household of Kufr, their subjects shall be deemed as foreigners.
b – The states with which we have economic or commercial or cultural or good neighbourly treaties are to be treated according to the terms of the treaties. Their subjects may enter our lands without the need for a passport if the treaties stipulate this, and provided our subjects are treated in a like manner. Economic and commercial relations shall be confined to specific items and specific points which are deemed necessary and at the same time do not lead to strengthening those states.
c – The states with which we have no treaties, and the effective imperialist states such as Britain, America and France, and the states that have designs on our lands, such as Russia, shall all be deemed as potentially belligerent states. Thus, all precautions shall be taken towards them and it would be wrong to establish diplomatic relations with them. Their subjects may enter the Islamic state with a passport and a visa specific to every individual and for every entry.
d – The state of war shall be the basis of our stance towards actual belligerent states such as “Israel”; they shall be treated as if we are effectively at war, irrespective of any truce we may have with them. All the subjects of such states shall not enter our lands. The lives and the properties of the non-Muslims from among their subjects shall be deemed legitimate targets.
Article 179 – All military treaties and whatever is deemed of their type and whatever is related to them, such as political treaties and agreements involving the leasing of military bases and airfields shall be categorically prohibited. Good neighbourly treaties, and economic, commercial, financial and cultural treaties, as well as armistice treaties may be concluded.
Article 180 – The states that are not effectively belligerent and not effectively imperialist and those that have no designs on our lands may establish diplomatic missions in our lands, provided their cultural and political activities, as well as their mandates and their movements are restricted.
Article 181 – The State may open embassies in the countries that are not effectively belligerent according to the interest of the Da’awah. The function of such embassies shall be to carry the Da’awah and to propagate Islam.
Article 182 – The State is prohibited from partaking in international organisations that are based on other than Islam or that implement non-Islamic rules such as the United Nations, the International Court of Justice, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, or regional organisations such as the League of Arab States and the Arab Development Institute.
These are the articles of the constitution that are derived from the Shari’ah evidences according to a sound Ijtihad; the incumbent reasons for these articles are fully elaborated in the book of “The Draft Constitution” published by Hizb-ut-Tahrir in 1963. We pray to Allah the Almighty to enable our Ummah to implement it effectively once these treacherous regimes that have wreaked havoc on earth and the regimes that are groomed to execute America’s plan for the region, namely the Grater Middle East Initiative, are swept away.
Allah (swt) says: And Judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile you from any of that (teaching) which Allah has sent down to you. And if they turn away, be assured that for some of their crime it is Allah’s purpose to punish them. And truly most men are rebellious. [5-49] T.M.Q.
4th Thil Hijja 1432h
31 October 2011
Source: Hizb ut-Tahrir
The Hizb ut-Tahrir Watch 