Author: Mohammad Dawood Yousufi Ishaqzai
Islam and Democracy (Part 7)
5. Other Obstacles to Determining the Election Winner and Allocating Parliamentary Seats
The people constitute the fundamental pillar of government. In reality, every country and territory exists for its people, providing them with security, stability, and adequate means of livelihood. Therefore, the establishment of any government should be based on securing the approval and satisfaction of the overwhelming majority of the population. When a governing authority assumes power while taking this principle into consideration and administers public affairs accordingly, there is reason to hope for its success and to expect the prosperity of the nation under its administration. Conversely, attaining power through coercion, intimidation, deception, or fraud produces nothing but disgrace and ultimately results in failure and public humiliation.
This is precisely why we maintain that democracy does not represent the ideal or most desirable system of governance capable of securing genuine public approval. The methods employed within democratic systems to select an individual or political party to govern the state fail to ensure the consent of the overwhelming majority of the people.
The following discussion explains these electoral methods in detail, demonstrates their inadequacy in selecting rulers, and establishes their practical shortcomings.
Following the casting of votes, the next stage involves counting the ballots, declaring the election winner, and distributing parliamentary seats. Several methods have been adopted for this purpose.
First: The Majority Electoral System
The majority system is divided into two principal forms:
1. The Plurality System: Under the plurality system, the candidate who receives more votes than any other candidate is declared the winner, regardless of whether they obtain an absolute majority of the votes cast. For example, suppose there are three candidates. One receives 40 percent of the votes, while the remaining two receive 35 percent and 25 percent, respectively. In this case, the first candidate is declared the winner.
The principal criticism of this method is that if more than three candidates participate, the winning candidate may receive more votes than any other individual candidate while still failing to obtain the support of more than half of the electorate. In the above example, the victorious candidate secured only 40 percent of the votes, meaning that 60 percent of voters did not support him.
To address this problem, several solutions have been proposed, one of which is holding a second round of elections in which only the candidates who obtained the highest number of votes participate.
2. The Absolute Majority System: Under the absolute majority system, the winning candidate must obtain more than half of the valid votes—that is, fifty percent plus one vote. This method also encounters difficulties. If no candidate secures the required majority in the first round, a second round of voting becomes necessary.
Neither of these majority systems fully achieves justice, since a considerable proportion of votes ultimately becomes ineffective. Under the absolute majority system, any candidate receiving less than fifty percent plus one vote is unsuccessful, rendering all those votes ineffective. Under the plurality system, an even larger proportion of votes may effectively be disregarded, as illustrated by the previous example in which 60 percent of the electorate did not vote for the winning candidate. Consequently, many countries adopted proportional representation in an effort to achieve greater electoral fairness.
Second: The Proportional Representation System (Representation of Political Minorities)
The two majority systems discussed above are generally applied in single-member constituency elections. In this arrangement, a country is divided into numerous electoral districts. For example, a city may be divided into several constituencies, with only one representative elected from each. For this reason, the majority system is often referred to as the single-member or district-based system.
Under proportional representation, however, elections are generally conducted on the basis of party lists, and for this reason the system is frequently known as the list system.
In proportional representation, parliamentary seats are allocated according to each party’s share of the total vote. For instance, if two political parties contest an election and one receives 60 percent of the votes while the other receives 40 percent, in a parliament consisting of one hundred seats, the first party receives sixty seats and the second party forty seats.
This system enables parties that receive relatively few votes to obtain parliamentary representation so that their votes are not entirely wasted. Accordingly, it is often argued that proportional representation is fairer than the majority system. For this reason, it enjoyed widespread support in nineteenth-century Europe and was adopted in many countries following the First World War. Nevertheless, it was later abandoned in a considerable number of states.
Despite its advantages, proportional representation is not free from defects. Its foremost weakness is that it often results in the election of numerous political parties to parliament, making it difficult for any single party to secure a parliamentary majority. Consequently, coalition governments composed of two or more parties become necessary. Such coalition governments are often unstable, leading to frequent cabinet changes and political instability. This situation adversely affects both the legislative branch (parliament) and the executive branch.
France historically experienced these difficulties, becoming one of the clearest examples of the shortcomings of proportional representation. Consequently, following the constitutional reforms of 1958, executive authority was strengthened, and broader powers were granted to the president of the Republic. Contemporary developments in Türkiye likewise illustrate the political instability that can arise when parliament and government become fragmented.
In other words, in the pursuit of fairness among political parties and in the name of democracy, proportional representation often produces a fragmented parliament and a weak government. This constitutes further evidence, according to this perspective, that the establishment of a strong government requires a reduction rather than an expansion of democratic mechanisms.
In light of the foregoing discussion, it appears that the concept of popular sovereignty in democracy is little more than an unfounded claim intended to influence public opinion. Political parties and candidates merely use the votes of the people as instruments to secure power and implement their own predetermined objectives, while paying little attention to the wishes of the electorate after achieving victory.
The Sharīʿah Perspective on Majority Rule in Elections
Previous discussions established that, within republican and democratic systems, political authority is acquired through elections, and whoever receives the greater number of votes assumes power. This raises an important question: Can the majority, from the perspective of Islamic law (Sharīʿah), legitimately serve as the criterion for determining political leadership?
Hakīm al-Islām Mawlānā Qārī Muhammad Tayyib Qāsimī (RA), one of the distinguished scholars of Darul Uloom Deoband, presented a thoughtful discussion on this issue. He concludes:
“The determining factor is the strength and soundness of an opinion, not the numerical superiority of those who hold it.”
Regarding the authority of the majority, he further states:
A large number of people supporting a particular position does not, in Islam, constitute a decisive criterion for distinguishing truth from falsehood. For this reason, the Noble Qur’an does not assign any intrinsic authority to the majority. On numerous occasions, it describes the majority of people as unreliable in matters of faith, governance, religion, and politics.
The Qur’an states:
-
«وَمَاأَكْثَرُالنَّاسِ وَلَوْحَرَصْتَ بِمُؤْمِنِينَ» Translation: “And most people, however eagerly you may desire it, will not believe.” (Yusouf: 103)
-
«وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ» Translation: “But most people do not believe.” (Ghafir 40:59)
-
«وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ» Translation: “And most of them do not reason.” (Al-Ma’idah 5:103)
-
وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ Translation: “But most people do not know.” (Ar-Rum 30:6)
-
وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَهُمْ يَجْهَلُونَ Translation: “But most of them are ignorant.” (Al-An’am 6:111)
-
وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَكُمْ لِلْحَقِّ كَارِهُونَ Translation: “But most of you dislike the truth.” (Az-Zukhruf 43:78)
-
وَأَنَّ أَكْثَرَكُمْ فَاسِقُونَ Translation: “And most of you are defiantly disobedient.” (Al-Ma’idah 5:59)
-
وَمَا يَتَّبِعُ أَكْثَرُهُمْ إِلَّا ظَنًّا Translation: “Most of them follow nothing but conjecture, and conjecture can never substitute for the truth.” (Yunus 10:36)
-
وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِنَ النَّاسِ عَنْ آيَاتِنَا لَغَافِلُونَ Translation: “Indeed, many people are heedless of Our verses.” (Yunus 10:92)
-
وَمَا وَجَدْنَا لِأَكْثَرِهِمْ مِنْ عَهْدٍ Translation: “We found no faithfulness to covenant in most of them.” (Al-A’raf 7:102)
-
وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ كَاذِبُونَ Translation: “And most of them are liars.” (Ash-Shu’ara 26:223)
-
وَلَقَدْ ضَلَّ قَبْلَهُمْ أَكْثَرُ الْأَوَّلِينَ Translation: “Indeed, most of the former peoples had already gone astray before them.” (As-Saffat 37:71)
-
لَقَدْ حَقَّ الْقَوْلُ عَلَى أَكْثَرِهِمْ Translation: “The decree has become binding upon most of them, so they will not believe.” (Yasin 36:7)
-
وَكَثِيرٌ حَقَّ عَلَيْهِ الْعَذَابُ Translation: “And many have deserved the punishment.” (Al-Hajj 22:18)
-
كَمْ مِنْ فِئَةٍ قَلِيلَةٍ غَلَبَتْ فِئَةً كَثِيرَةً Translation: “How often has a small group overcome a much larger one by the permission of Allah?” (Al-Baqarah 2:249)
-
لَقَدْ نَصَرَكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي مَوَاطِنَ كَثِيرَةٍ Translation: “Indeed, Allah granted you victory on many battlefields… and on the Day of Hunayn, when your great numbers impressed you, they were of no benefit to you.” (At-Tawbah 9:25)
-
قُلْ لَا يَسْتَوِي الْخَبِيثُ وَالطَّيِّبُ “Say: The impure and the pure are not equal, even though the abundance of the impure may impress you.” (Al-Ma’idah 5:100)
-
وَإِنْ تُطِعْ أَكْثَرَ مَنْ فِي الْأَرْضِ Translation: “If you obey most of those upon the earth, they will lead you away from the path of Allah.” (Al-An’am 6:116)
