1. The Holy Quran clearly states that all sovereignty belongs to Allah: «إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلاَّ لِلَّه» (There is no command or decree except for Allah.)
2. «وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بمَا أَنْزَلَ اللهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ» (And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the disbelievers.)
3. «وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ» (Whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, then they are the wrongdoers.)
4. «وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ» (Whoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed, then they are the transgressors.)
From the perspective of the Holy Quran, whoever disobeys Allah’s command has entered the realm of the tyrants and oppressors who consider any action and behavior towards their people permissible, deny any rights they have, and prepare the ground for tyranny in society.
2. Consensus (Ijma) is another of the most important documents for the legitimacy of the political system of Islam, especially the Caliphate of the Rightly Guided Ones (Khulafai Rashidun), and is the greatest principle for justifying the political system. The strongest and highest level of consensus is the consensus and agreement of the Sahaba; because the Sahaba were the first generation of Muslims who lived with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and participated in jihad and other activities with him. They saw and heard the actions and words of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and were more knowledgeable about the rules and secrets of Islam.
The consensus of the Sahaba is well known. After the death of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), they agreed that there must be someone to succeed the Prophet, and for this purpose, they tried to elect a caliph; no one has reported that any of the Sahaba rejected the Imam and the caliph. Thus, the consensus of the Sahaba proves the necessity of the existence of the caliphate, and this is the principle that can be used as justification for the legitimacy of the caliphate. However, the role of consensus in the political system of Islam is not only about the caliph himself, but also the consensus of the Sahaba and Muslims on the necessity of establishing the caliphate as a political system. The principle of consensus is based on the principles of ijtihad, which derive from the Quran and Sunnah.
Principles of the Islamic Political System
Council
The council is one of the important principles of the Islamic political system. From one perspective, the political system in Islam is a consultative government, meaning a government that functions through a council. The council is a fundamental principle in all areas of the political and social systems of Islam. It is also essential for the proper functioning of state institutions, its overall activities, and its Islamic identity. The Holy Quran commands Muslims to make decisions on public and other issues after consultation, which makes the council obligatory; much like the commands that require prayer and zakat, the council is also a direct command of the Quran. Even the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who was guided by Allah in a special way, always consulted his Sahaba, representatives of his tribes, and followers before making decisions. His successors were just as supportive of the council institution as he was.
In this regard, Sharia neither limits the Shura to the religious sphere nor provides a specific form or detailed procedures for it; rather, it leaves the door open for Muslims to choose the most appropriate methods according to their own time and place. The silence of Sharia regarding the form of the Shura indicates the need for timely and continuous legislation. This legislation concerns implementation and other matters that the Sharia has not mentioned, as well as other matters for which it has only presented its general basic principles without proposing detailed laws. In both cases, it is up to the scholars to declare Sharia opinions through ijtihad on matters requiring detailed legislation; and of course, these opinions and views must align with the spirit of Sharia. It is obvious that legislation should not contradict the spirit of Sharia.
Regarding the legislative power of the state, various examples have survived from the early period of Islam. The Prophet himself (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) consulted his Sahaba before making decisions on matters that Sharia did not detail; the opinions of Abu Bakr and Umar regarding the prisoners of the Battle of Badr are just two of the thousands of examples in this regard. By leaving matters to the Muslims and consulting them, the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) showed that he wanted them to freely participate in that sensitive matter of decision-making. The successors of the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) continued his practices in different styles and ways.
It should be remembered that the meaning of sovereignty is Allah’s, which means that in Islam, “Allah” is the ruler of the state; because sovereignty does not belong to Allah himself, but Allah has placed sovereignty within the framework of Sharia. The Islamic state is also limited by Sharia. Therefore, the sovereignty of the Islamic state is essentially the same as the sovereignty of Sharia, and the Sharia limits the power of the state and regulates its duties. Limiting the power of government to Sharia means a form of theocracy.
Consequently, the legislator is Allah, contrasting the Islamic system with democracy, where people make laws for themselves. Since Sharia does not provide the details for all aspects of life and is silent on some issues—like the method of Shura and the structures and duties of the state, as well as the responsibilities between the state and the people—it indicates the need for timely and continuous legislation. It is permissible for Muslims to legislate on issues that Sharia does not mention and on matters for which it has only presented general principles without detailed rulings; however, this does not imply that people are free to pass and enact any law they want, as is the case in a democracy where people legislate for themselves. In Islam, scholars legislate based on Sharia, whereas in democracy, people legislate based on their will, even though the spirit of humanity is not inherently religious, while Sharia and its spirit align with the common moral sense of humanity. Islam and democracy are rivals and are always in conflict.
By admin2
