Why we need a Caliphate to restore stability to the Muslim world

Wednesday, December 14th, 2011 | Posted by Noor

It is now routine to talk of a Muslim world in crisis. But an end to the misery appears no closer. Despite experimenting with numerous models and indeed being the subject of recent experiments with liberalism, the autocracy, dictatorships, growing dissent and instability appear no closer resolved. Problems are deep rooted; some even talk of a Middle Eastern ‘exceptionalism’ to describe the region’s apparent inability to move forward. Fresh ideas and approaches are needed if we are to overcome the status quo.

The Caliphate – the Islamic order that governed the Muslim world for centuries – is increasingly presented by Muslims and Islamic movements as key to shaping the future and overcoming the lack of progress and stability that plagues the Muslim world. Some in the West suggest the Caliphate is a pre-modern system unable to deal with current political challenges. But it is our contention that the Caliphate will be a stabilising force for the Muslim world.

These are some of our reasons:

Firstly, the Caliphate system is consistent with – not alien to – the values of the people in the Muslim world. This provides it deep roots and a better chance at working in partnership with its populations because it engages them on a common point of reference and for common goals. But it also means the Caliphate acts as a guarantor for those values considered by Muslims most under threat since its demise. Secular, autocratic regimes that emerged in the Caliphate’s wake significantly curtailed Islamic practice and engineered new readings of Islamic values and history, often imposing views that broke with orthodoxy to demand loyalty to divisive and failed ideologies from Arabism to communism. The import of foreign value systems too is often associated with the threat of eroding deeply Islamic values – ‘western’ values for example are associated with moral and sexual decadence. A political system that credibly protects Islamic values is key to securing public confidence and partnership – and providing the much-needed glue that cements a contract between citizens and their rulers.

Secondly, the Caliphate is an accountable political system whose head is legitimised only through popular consent. That immediately separates it from the current regimes that currently litter the Muslim world, which are unrepresentative, unaccountable and inherently fragile and unstable as a result. With no means of recourse and no channels to express dissent or criticism, peoples’ concerns have become threatening political undercurrents, even threats of rebellion and overthrow. The Caliphate, in striking contrast, engages voices of dissent through the political system by providing extensive channels for accounting all parts of the states’ apparatus as well as a consultative assembly made-up of elected representatives with significant powers.

Thirdly, the loss of the Caliphate brought with it an unprecedented loss of authority and leadership on Islamic issues. The resulting vacuum allowed individuals to unanimously declare themselves spokespersons for Islam, and to become figureheads for merely speaking the rhetoric of anti-colonialism and standing-up to aggressors. This crisis in leadership after the Caliphate dangerously allowed its functions to be dismembered and claimed by virtually anyone who was willing to take them on, from tax collection, to defending Muslim territory (and deciding when and how) to defining the relationship between Islam and other peoples. The Caliphate was the only institution able to provide credible leadership on Islamic issues and the only legitimate Islamic system charged with the responsibility of administering Islamic temporal law and international diplomacy.

Fourth, many of the problems facing the Muslim world are caused or compounded by division. Artificial borders created after ‘independence’ from colonial rule have led to disputes over land, waterways and resources, and been the cause of bloodshed and strife. Furthermore, the deficiencies in resources in these small nation states has prompted Muslim countries to become dependent upon external powers, and not develop the self-reliance that is required for any state to stand on its own feet.

The emergence of the nation state and nationalism has created strangers out of regional neighbours and has also led to the slow disintegration of states that hold multiple ethnicities, or communities, who have continued the demand for independence and thus undermined the overall integrity of the nations they live in. The examples of this across the Muslim world are numerous and is a constant source of unrest and instability. The Caliphate does not consider its population through the prism of ethnicity but rather enshrines the concept of citizenship. It also has an unrivalled history in dealing with different ethnic and religious minorities, much of which has been shattered through the emergence of artificial nation states that have subsequently competed and fought each other over boundaries that lack any historical or Islamic precedent.

The goal of replacing unrepresentative unaccountable rulers with a political system that is neither and which draws on strong ideological commonalities with its people can only be a stabilising force. The Caliphate represents an alternative political vision for the Muslim world and a political system that draws on a strong historical record.

source : www.newcivilisation.com

Hukum Sambutan Tahun Baru Cina

Isnin, 23 Januari 2012 15:05 15 tahun-baru-cinaTerdapat sebahagian daripada masyarakat Muslim yang mengatakan bahawa menyambut Tahun Baru Cina itu hanyalah suatu adat tradisi semata-mata dan ia tidak termasuk sebahagian daripada mana-mana ajaran agama tertentu. Dengan hujah tersebut, umat Islam khususnya yang beretnik Tionghua dianggap boleh untuk meraikan Tahun Baru Cina. Persoalannya, benarkah Tahun Baru Cina hanya merupakan adat tradisi semata-mat dan adakah umat Islam dibolehkan untuk meraikannya? Penulisan ini bertujuan untuk merungkai persoalan ini agar kita mendapat gambaran yang jelas tentang latar belakang sambutan Tahun Baru Cina serta pandangan hukum syarak ke atas perkara tersebut. Ajaran Agama Konfusianisme, Bukan Sekadar Adat Tradisi Tionghua Kita sering mendengar daripada kalangan kaum Tionghua termasuk tokoh-tokoh yang telah memeluk Islam bahawa sambutan Tahun Baru Cina ini adalah sekadar adat tradisi semata-mata dan ia tidak mempunyai kaitan dengan ajaran sesuatu agama. Oleh itu, umat Islam dianggap boleh untuk turut serta dalam merayakannya. Jika kita benar-benar mendalami ajaran agama Konfusianisme, khususnya tentang sambutan perayaan-perayaan mereka, maka akan terbukti bahawa kenyataan tersebut adalah tidak benar. Ini adalah kerana sambutan Tahun Baru Cina adalah merupakan sebahagian daripada ajaran agama Konfusianisme yang tidak dapat dipisahkan dan ia bukannya adat tradisi semata-mata. Dalam sebuah buku karangan penganut Konfusianisme, Dr. Hendrik Agus Winarso yang berjudul 'Mengenal Hari Raya Konfusian' (Semarang : Effhar & Dahara Prize, 2003) hal. vi-vii, ia menyatakan bahawa kebanyakan masyarakat kurang memahami Hari Raya Konfusianisme. Beliau memberi contoh, “Misalnya Tahun Baru Cina yang dianggap sebagai tradisi orang Tionghua.” Oleh yang demikian, pandangan yang mengatakan bahawa sambutan Tahun Baru Cina adalah sekadar adat tradisi dan tidak ada hubung kait dengan agama adalah suatu kesalahfahaman, menurut penulis berkenaan (Ibid., hal. v). Dalam buku tersebut, Dr. Hendrik telah membuktikan dengan meyakinkan bahawa sambutan Tahun Baru Cina adalah sebahagian daripada ajaran Konfusianisme. Dr. Hendrik menerangkan, Tahun Baru Cina atau dikenali juga sebagai Sin Cia, merupakan suatu momentum untuk memperbaharui diri. Momentum ini dinyatakan dalam salah sebuah kitab suci Konfusianisme iaitu kitab Lee Ki, bahagian Gwat Ling, yang berbunyi : “Hari permulaan tahun (Liep Chun) jadikanlah sebagai Hari Agung untuk bersembahyang besar ke hadrat Thian, kerana Maha Besar Kebajikan Thian. Dilihat tiada nampak, didengar tiada dengar, namun tiap yang wujud tiada yang tanpa Dia… (Tiong Yong XV : 1-5). (Lihat Hendrik Agus Winarso, Mengenal Hari Raya Konfusian, [Semarang : Effhar & Dahara Prize, 2003], hal. 60-61). Penulis tersebut telah membuat membuat kesimpulan bahawa sambutan Tahun Baru Cina adalah merupakan sebahagian daripada ajaran Konfusianisme. Beliau mengatakan bahawa: “Dengan demikian, menyambut Tahun Baru bagi umat Konfusianisme Indonesia mempunyai erti ketakwaan dan keimanan.” (ibid., hal. 61). Maka oleh itu adalah tidak benar pendapat-pendapat yang menyatakan bahawa sambutan Tahun Baru Cina adalah hanya sekadar adat tradisi orang Tionghua semata-mata dan ia bukan perayaan agama. Sedangkan hakikatnya, ia adalah sebahagian daripada ajaran agama Konfusianisme. Selain itu, sebagai seorang Muslim, kayu ukur untuk melihat sama ada boleh atau pun tidak untuk melakukan sesuatu perkara bukanlah dilihat dari segi agama atau tradisi. Sebahagian umat beranggapan, jika ia berasal daripada adat tradisi, adalah tidak mengapa dan boleh untuk diamalkan. Tetapi jika ia berasal daripada agama lain, maka ia tidak boleh. Sesungguhnya kayu ukur sebegini adalah batil dan tidak boleh diguna pakai dalam Islam. Dalam Islam, satu-satunya kayu ukur yang benar adalah Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah semata-mata. Firman Allah SWT: “Ikutilah apa yang diturunkan kepadamu daripada Tuhanmu dan janganlah kamu mengikuti pemimpin-pemimpin selain daripadaNya.” [TMQ Al-A’raaf (7) : 3] Kalimat “maa unzila ilaikum min rabbikum” (apa yang diturunkan kepadamu daripada Tuhanmu), adalah merujuk kepada Al-Qur`an dan As-Sunnah. (Tafsir Al-Baidhawi, [Beirut : Dar Shaadir], Juz III/2). Maka, kayu ukur sesuatu perbuatan sama ada boleh ataupun tidak boleh untuk dilakukan adalah Al-Qur`an dan As-Sunnah. Apa sahaja yang benar menurut Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah, bererti ia boleh dilakukan. Sebaliknya, apa sahaja yang batil menurut Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah, bererti ia tidak boleh untuk dilakukan. Oleh yang demikian, jika kita hendak menilai perbuatan kaum Muslimin yang turut serta dalam merayakan Tahun Baru Cina menurut Islam, maka tolok ukurnya haruslah benar. Kita perlu melihat adakah perbuatan tersebut boleh atau pun tidak menurut Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah, dan bukannya melihat sama ada aadakah ia daripada tradisi ataupun daripada ajaran agama. Jika kita menggunakan kayu ukur tradisi atau agama dalam membuat penilaian, maka kita akan tersesat. Bukan semua tradisi adalah benar. Ada yang bertentangan dengan Islam dan ada bersesuaian dengan Islam. Sebagai contoh, amalan seks bebas atau seks di luar nikah adalah tradisi masyarakat Kristian Barat, sedangkan perbuatan jijik tersebut bukan sebahagian daripada ajaran agama Kristian/Katholik. Malah agama Kristian pun turut mengharamkan zina. Jadi, adakah disebabkan seks bebas atau seks di luar nikah itu merupakan suatu tradisi dan bukan daripada ajaran agama, maka umat Islam pun boleh turut serta melakukannya? Tentu sekali tidak boleh. Marilah kita kembali menggunakan kayu ukur yang benar untuk menilai sesuatu perbuatan. Kayu ukurnya bukan dilihat dari segi asal usulnya sama ada sesuatu perbuatan itu datangnya daripada tradisi ataupun agama. Sebaliknya melihat dari segi sama ada boleh ataupun tidak perbuatan tersebut menurut Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah. Inilah satu-satunya pandangan yang haq dan tidak ada lagi yang lain. Haram Bagi Muslim Turut Serta Meraikan Tahun Baru Cina Jika dikaji berdasarkan dalil-dalil Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah, maka adalah haram hukumnya bagi seseorang Muslim untuk turut serta dalam merayakan hari raya agama lain, termasuklah Tahun Baru Cina, tidak kira sama ada dengan mengikuti ritual agamanya ataupun tidak, termasuk juga memberi ucapan Gong Xi Fatt Chai. Kesemuanya adalah haram. Imam Suyuthi berkata, “Juga termasuk perbuatan mungkar, iaitu turut serta merayakan hari raya orang Yahudi, hari raya orang-orang kafir, hari raya selain orang Arab [yang tidak Islami], ataupun hari raya orang-orang Arab yang tersesat. Orang Muslim tidak boleh melakukan perbuatan tersebut kerana perkara itu akan membawa mereka ke jurang kemungkaran…” (Imam Suyuthi, Al-Amru bi Al-Ittiba’ wa An-Nahyu ‘An Al-Ibtida` (terj.), hal. 91). Khusus tentang memberi ucapan “selamat” terhadap sambutan agama lain, Imam Ibnu Qayyim Al-Jauziyyah berkata, “Adapun memberi ucapan selamat yang berkaitan syiar-syiar kekufuran yang menjadi ciri khas kaum kafir, hukumnya adalah haram menurut kesepakatan ulama', misalnya memberi ucapan selamat atas hari raya atau puasa mereka...” (Ahkam Ahli Adz-Dzimmah, [Beirut : Darul Kutub Al-'Ilmiyah], 1995, Juz I/162). Dalil Al-Quran yang mengharamkan perbuatan kaum Muslimin untuk merayakan hari raya agama kafir adalah melalui firman Allah SWT : “Dan (hamba-hamba Tuhan Yang Maha Penyayang itu adalah) orang-orang yang tidak menghadiri kebohongan…” [TMQ Al-Furqan (25) : 72]. Menurut Imam Ibnu Taimiyah, makna yang tepat bagi kalimat “laa yashhaduuna az-zuur” dalam ayat tersebut adalah tidak menghadiri kebohongan (az-zuur), dan bukannya memberi kesaksian palsu. Dalam bahasa Arab, memberi kesaksian palsu diungkapkan dengan kalimat yashhaduuna bi az-zuur, yakni terdapat tambahan huruf jar yang dibaca bi. Maka ayat di atas yang berbunyi “laa yashhaduuna az-zuur” yang lebih tepat adalah bermaksud “tidak menghadiri kebohongan”, dan bukannya “memberi kesaksian palsu.” (M. Bin Ali Adh-Dhabi’i, Mukhtarat min Kitab Iqtidha` Shirathal Mustaqim Mukhalafati Ash-habil Jahim (terj.), hal. 59-60) Manakala kata “az-zuur” (kebohongan) itu sendiri, menurut sebahagian tabi’in seperti Mujahid, adh-Dhahak, Rabi’ bin Anas dan Ikrimah adalah hari-hari kebesaran kaum Musyrik atau kaum jahiliyah sebelum Islam (Imam Suyuthi, Al-Amru bi Al-Ittiba’ wa An-Nahyu ‘An Al-Ibtida` (terj.), hal. 91-95). Maka ayat di atas adalah dalil kepada haramnya bagi seseorang Muslim untuk merayakan hari raya agama lain seperti hari Natal, Wesak, Deepavali, Tahun Baru Cina dan sebagainya. Imam Suyuthi juga berdalil dengan dua ayat lain sebagai dasar pengharaman bagi Muslim untuk turut serta merayakan hari raya agama lain (Lihat Imam Suyuthi, ibid., hal. 92). Salah satu daripadanya adalah ayat : “Dan sesungguhnya jika kamu mengikuti keinginan mereka setelah datangnya ilmu (kebenaran) kepadamu, sesungguhnya jika demikian kamu termasuk golongan orang-orang yang zalim.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah (2) : 145]. Menurut Imam Suyuthi, larangan pada ayat di atas bukan hanya khusus kepada Nabi SAW, tetapi juga merangkumi umat Islam secara umum. Larangan tersebut adalah larangan untuk melakukan perbuatan sebagaimana yang dilakukan oleh orang-orang bodoh atau orang kafir (seperti merayakan hari raya mereka). Walhal yang mereka lakukan itu bukanlah perbuatan yang diredhai oleh Allah dan RasulNya (Lihat Imam Suyuthi, ibid., hal. 92). Adapun dalil daripada As-Sunnah, hadis daripada Rasulullah SAW, “Barangsiapa yang menyerupai sesuatu kaum, maka ia termasuk dalam golongan mereka.” (HR Abu Dawud). Dalam hadis ini, Islam telah mengharamkan kaum Muslimin untuk menyerupakan atau menyamakan diri mereka dengan kaum kafir dalam perkara-perkara yang menjadi ciri khas bagi kekafiran mereka, seperti perayaan hari raya mereka. Oleh itu, adalah haram hukumnya seseorang Muslim untuk turut serta merayakan hari raya agama lain (Lihat Syeikh Abdul Aziz bin Abdullah bin Baz, Penjelasan Tuntas Hukum Seputar Perayaan, [Solo : Pustaka Al-Ummat], 2006, hal. 76). Berdasarkan kajian fakta dan dalil-dalil Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah yang telah dinyatakan di atas, adalah jelas bahawa haram hukumnya bagi seseorang Muslim untuk merayakan Tahun Baru Cina dalam segala bentuk dan juga manifestasinya. Haram bagi kaum Muslimin untuk terikut-ikut dalam mengucapkan Gong Xi Fatt Chai kepada kaum Tionghua, begitu juga haram bagi Muslim untuk menghiasi rumah atau biliknya dengan tanglung khas Cina atau hiasan naga dan pelbagai aksesori lain yang serba merah, kerana itu semua mempunyai kepercayaan tertentu dalam agama tersebut. Haram juga untuk mengadakan pelbagai jenis pertunjukan untuk meraikan Tahun Baru Cina seperti live band, karaoke mandarin dan lain-lain. Semua bentuk perbuatan tersebut haram dilakukan oleh Muslim kerana ia termasuk dalam perbuatan merayakan hari raya agama kafir yang telah diharamkan oleh Al-Quran dan As-Sunnah. Seruan Kepada Muslim Etnik Tionghua Akhir sekali, kami ingin menyeru saudara-saudara kami dari kalangan etnik Tionghua, hendaklah kalian masuk ke dalam agama Islam secara keseluruhannya (kaffah). Janganlah kalian (semoga Allah melimpahkan rahmatNya kepada kalian semua) mengikuti jejak langkah syaitan, yakni masuk ke dalam agama Islam namun pada masa yang sama masih lagi mempertahankan sebahagian daripada ajaran lama yang dahulunya pernah kalian anuti dan amalkan, seperti perayaan Tahun Baru Cina. Renungilah firman Allah SWT : “Wahai orang-orang yang beriman, masuklah kamu ke dalam Islam secara kaffah (keseluruhannya), dan janganlah kamu menurut jejak langkah syaitan. Sesungguhnya syaitan itu adalah musuh yang nyata bagi kamu.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah (2) : 208] Wallahua’lam bissawab. Sumber: Mykhilafah.com

O Muslims of Syria: Stay firm upon the Haqq because verily this regime is on the brink of a pit of fire

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Following the fourth speech of Bashaar...

On Tuesday 10/01/2012 the tyrant Bashaar gave his fourth speech at Damascus University. Ten months have passed in which he has committed the most obscene massacres against his people. He repeated himself again, reiterating his commitment to his vision for dealing with the crisis and declared that he is in the midst of a battle against criminality which he is engaged in fighting and that he is not in a shell. He employed the same type of words and statements used to justify the killing of people like: 'A foreign conspiracy', 'Sectarian strife', 'Fighting against terrorism', 'An invitation to reform'...and the most dangerous of which was when he made clear his determination to deal with criminality when he repeatedly made one threat after another saying: "This will not be achieved except by striking the terrorists hard" knowing full well that those he is describing as terrorists and conspirators are none other than the unarmed believing Syrian people including its children, youth and elders, its men and women, its labourers and academics... those who he is taking revenge upon only because they have said to Bashaar: "You are a Zhaalim (oppressor)"!

Indeed this regime proves day after day that it does not deserve to go on living any longer, not even for an extra hour because it is a regime which is an enemy to its people that has the notion nestling in its head that it is necessary to commit murder! As such it has not withdrawn even in the least of ways and instead has revealed its determination to continue killing and bring about termination, a matter which has begun to put pressure in the direction of those of his own gang that surround him.

What made Bashaar's thinking reach to this level of criminality is the support from America including all its manoeuvrings, the inaction of the Arab and so called official Islamic entities, the weakness of the opposition, its divisions and contradictions due to its distance from Islam in addition to the collusion of the Arab League and its General Secretary who have been manufactured by America which has provided the Syrian regime more time to increase its killing. Despite all of this he will never be able by the permission of Allah to stop what is happening in Syria due to the insurmountable determination of the people, their patience and their willingness to bear sacrifices! Due to this Bashaar does not see any solution except the increase of killing so Bashaar came out in his speech declaring that the only way to solve the problem is to bring about termination and he repeated this wording ten times in his speech.

O revolutionary Muslims in the Shaam of the Messenger and the Shaam of Khair (goodness)!

You have indeed given the most brilliant examples for the entire world to take note of in facing this immoral regime, and you have shown real rare metal in determination. It was only due to your Imaan (belief) in Allah that is within your souls that has caused your old and young, men and women to gather together upon which you have gathered upon. So blessed be your strength, and blessed be your stand, your chants and resistance which have exposed the true reality of this criminal regime when they faced you with their brutal war machine. So remain firm because verily this regime is on the brink of a pit of fire and it will collapse very soon by the permission of Allah Ta'Aalaa. Close your ranks and hold firmly to your covenant which you made when you declared: "We will not bow down to other than Allah" so the issue is like you sincerely and truthfully declared by the will of Allah Ta'Aalaa: "If you give victory for Allah then Allah will give you victory." And what is more excellent than the truthful words that were sung in your chants in Homs: "Are you waiting for the victory from Obama? Are you waiting for the victory from Erdogan?" Then you answered with fire in your throats that stirred the Imaan so that the whole world could hear: "There is nothing for us except Allah".

O revolutionary Muslims in the Shaam of the Messenger and the home of the promised Khilafah!

Indeed the establishment of the rightly guided Khilafah in the blessed land of Shaam upon the ruins of this criminal regime is your opportunity to take the honour of establishing the promise of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم by establishing it for its last time in your blessed land. So have Tawakkul upon Allah when seeking it with sincerity and Imaan and make it the aim of the revolution so that you can save yourselves and your Ummah through it from the clutches of the western disbelievers and from the fallacy and weakness of the democratic ruling systems to the truthful solutions from pure Islam. Here is Hizb-ut-Tahrir calling you, and it is sincerely bound to you to work in accordance to the method of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم and there is no method that can stand up to it in terms of uprightness as Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

قُلْ هَذِهِ سَبِيلِي أَدْعُو إِلَى الله عَلَى بَصِيرَةٍ أَنَا وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَنِي وَسُبْحَانَ الله وَمَا أَنَا مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ

"Say this is my way, I call to Allah upon awareness, I and those who follow me and Glory be to Allah and I am not from the Mushrikeen." [Yusuf, 12:108]

Hizb-ut-Tahrir

Wilayah of Syria

16 Safar 1433

10/01/2012

Original Arabic leaflet:http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/info/index.php/contents/entry_15994

The shari'ah and the rule of law – Islamic governance for the 21stcentury

THURSDAY, 19 JANUARY 2012 17:59 WAKIL ABU MUJAHID

The year 2011 ended with an irreversibly changed Middle East where the hegemony of several dictators collapsed at the hands of their oppressed populations. The Syrian and Yemeni peoples' immense sacrifice and desire for change continue into 2012. There is little doubt that the world will further witness the collapse of other dictatorial regimes in the region.

Whilst the Muslims of the Middle East continue to sacrifice their sweat and blood for liberation from the shackles of dictatorship, the debate about the aftermath continues. In Egypt, for example, although the Ancien Régime remains largely intact, parliamentary elections were conducted at the end of November 2011 and the presidential election is expected to be held in July 2012. Nevertheless, the question of the form and character of the system of governance is far from settled. Although the role of Islam in the state will be inevitable, its extent of influence remains far from clear.

The Anglo-French-American triple alliance has added to the mist of confusion, as they painstakingly attempt to hijack the spirit of the protesters in order to install a new generation of rulers who would ensure the security and furtherance of Western interests in the region.

In such cataclysmic circumstances, the subject of whether Islam can deliver the rule of law under the shari'ah is in the minds of millions of Muslims. After all, nobody wants to return to the repressive days of Mubarak, Ben Ali and Gaddafi. People want an accountable, transparent, fair and just authority.

This article explores how the Islamic shari'ah can realise the hopes and aspirations of the millions of protesters in the Arab spring by ensuring that the rule of law is established. This article surveys the illustrious Islamic history and highlights how Islamic rule guaranteed the rule of law many centuries before the Europeans even dreamt of such standards. It is argued that the rule of law in the Muslim world can only be instituted under Islamic rule.

Definition of the "rule of law"

Prior to launching into defining the rule of law, it is important that certain misconceptions are dispelled. One such fallacy is the argument by many Western politicians that the rule of law is the monopoly of Western secular democracy. [1] For example, Thomas Bingham, the former lord chief justice of the English courts said, "There has been much debate whether the rule of law can exist without democracy. Some have argued that it can". [2] Bingham's assumption is premised on an erroneous notion that good governance can only be the result of democracy.

The West has hitherto paraded democracy as the only system available to mankind but failed to convince the Muslim world that democracy is the panacea for all its ills. As Mark Welton quite aptly recognises, "Democracy... is a high-value term loaded with positive connotations for Americans and Europeans. But the same term, used so indiscriminately by Western politicians, is also widely perceived in the Arab Middle East as a codeword, a "guise for Western efforts to re-conquer Arab territories and plunder their natural resources". [3]

The Islamic legal and historical sources strongly rebut the suggestion that the rule of law is the sole possession of the West. As Welton elucidates, "...the concept embodied in the term "rule of law" is in fact a legal and political value shared by both the West and Islam, and if properly refined, can provide a useful framework for more effective discourse and understanding between these two traditions".

So what do we commonly understand by the principle of the rule of law? Let us look at Bingham's definition. Bingham asserts that under the rule of law "all persons and authorities within the state, whether public or private, should be bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly and prospectively promulgated and publicly administered in the courts". [4] Islam in principle has no objection to this definition insofar as this definition can manifest within the Islamic legal and political framework. [5]

The rule of law necessitates that law is accessible and clear so that citizens of a state are aware of the boundaries of the law, which they must obey. The rule of law also applies to government and guarantees certain basic rights such as presumption of innocence until proven guilty, not to be arbitrarily detained without due process and right to fair trial in an independent court. All the executive and judicial organs of a state must uphold the rule of law because nobody is above the law. [6]

Brief analysis of the system of governance in Islam

It is well known that the system of governance in Islam is the Khilafah (caliphate). This system is well rooted both in the Islamic shari'ah and the history of Islam. It is a system that is quite unlike the Western democratic paradigm. The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "The Prophets ruled over the children of Israel; whenever a prophet died, another prophet succeeded him, but there will be no more prophet after me. There will soon be khulafah and they will number many. Fulfil the bayah [i.e. pledge of allegiance] to them one after another and give them their dues for Allah will verily account them about what He سبحانه وتعالى entrusted them with". [7]

The Khalifah is the guardian of the people and his task is to ensure that the shari'ah is implemented so that justice prevails. Allah says,

وَإِنْ حَكَمْتَ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْقِسْطِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ

"And if you judge, judge with justice between them. Verily, Allah loves those who act justly". [8]

Under the Khilafah, there is no separate legislature because the power of legislation lay not in man but in the Creator of man. Allah says,

فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ

"So judge between them by what Allah has revealed..." [9]

Allah also says,

إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ

"The command (or the judgement) is for none but Allah". [10]

Sovereignty belongs to the laws of Allah, the shari'ah, not the people. It is the Khalifah who implements the shari'ah in the lands of Islam. As imam Abu'l Hasan al-Mawardi (died 450 AH) states, "Imamate is prescribed to succeed prophethood as a means of protecting the deen [Islam] and of managing the affairs of this world". [11]

The rule of law is therefore established on the basis of the shari'ah. As Welton states, "The Islamic world, too, has a devotion to the rule of law that has prevailed through much of its history and, while severely impaired in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by Western colonialism and its aftermath, has resurfaced as a desired virtue, fully compatible with Islamic law and tradition". [12]

How the shari'ah guarantees the rule of law

This section of the article seeks to illustrate what role the people, the Khalifah and the judiciary play in establishing the rule of law under shari'ah.

a) The people

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says,

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنْكُمْ ۖ فَإِنْ تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ

"O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (Muhammad), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger". [13]

Allah has thus obliged Muslims to obey the ruler who rules by the shari'ah.

Moreover, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "A Muslim is obliged to hear and obey whether he likes it or not, except when he is required to do something that is sinful, in which case, there is no obligation to hear or to obey". [14] Unlike democracies where obedience to the law of the land requires coercion by the state, Muslims historically lived by and obeyed the laws of Islam by and large without the need for coercion. This is because respect for and obedience to the laws of Islam is a matter of doctrinal and creedal obligation upon Muslims, which was the reason behind the success of the Khilafah. Thus, when Allah ordains upon Muslims to obey their rightful ruler, there is no option but to observe this command. This principle is well established in Islam from numerous ayat and ahadith.

b) The Khalifah

It is beyond the scope of this paper to elucidate the process of electing the Khalifah; however, it suffices to say that the majority of the classical scholars of Islam are unified on the view that the Khalifah assumes authority by approval and authority of the people. As imam al-Mawardi asserts, "...it is necessary for the electors to agree to his Imamate and that once agreed, it comes into effect because Imamate is a contractual agreement and it is not brought into being except by the contracting partner". [15] The post-colonial despotic rulers of the Muslim world are therefore an anomaly in the history of Muslims.

The first Khalifah of Islam, Abu Bakr (RA), in his inaugural address said, "O People, I have been appointed over you, though I am not the best among you. If I do well, then help me. And if I act wrongly, then correct me... If I disobey Allah and His Messenger, then I have no right to your obedience".

The second Khalifah of Islam, 'Umar bin al-Khattab (RA) enunciated the attributes required of a Khalifah, "By Allah, O Ibn 'Abbas, only the strong person without violence, the one who is gentle without being weak, the one who is economical but without being miserly, and the one who is generous without being wasteful is worthy of this affair". [16]

The above abundantly illustrate that the Khalifah (and thus his executive subordinates) is required to be mindful of his obligations to the people and the shari'ah. He cannot be above the law but rather is subject to the law like everyone else.

The Khalifah fulfils, amongst the myriad of other obligations, the following as part of his responsibilities. The Khalifah must:

1. guard and protect Islam and its way of life against external influences and ensure that innovations do not creep into the pure message of Islam;

2. establish justice where disputes arise between litigants so that the strong does not oppress the weak;

3. implement the Islamic hadd punishment (i.e. criminal laws) so that the prohibitions of Islam are not violated;

4. possess the appropriate defence capabilities in order to defend the territories of the Islamic state and its citizens against external attacks;

5. manage the fiscal affairs of the state and collect the taxes prescribed by the shari'ah e.g. kharaj, zakah, jizya and ushur etc;

6. manage the funds of the treasury (Bait-ul-Mal), invest in public projects he considers necessary without being wasteful and pay the public sector employees' salaries from the treasury; and

7. assume personal responsibility over the affairs of the people and execute the policies of the ummah without overreliance on delegation of authority.

Provided that the Khalifah conducts himself in accordance with the shari'ah as abovementioned, he would be deemed to have discharged his obligation to Allah and the people.

c) The judges

The Khilafah also has a strong judiciary which implements the laws of Islam, dispenses justice and keeps the executive accountable. Everybody under the shari'ah is equal before the law and judgment is pronounced without fear or favour. Principally, there are three types of judges in Islam: [17]

1. the Qadi settles disputes between people in private law matters and implements the penal codes;

2. the Muhtasib is responsible for dealing with communitywide issues that affect the public and wider society, e.g. unscrupulous traders who harm the wider public; and

3. the Mazaalim is responsible for investigating and settling the disputes between the ruler and the ruled. Essentially, this judge keeps the executive accountable and in checks.

When the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was the head of the Islamic state in Medina, he was petitioned to intercede for a noble lady who had committed theft, but the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said, "The nations before [us] were destroyed because if a noble person committed theft, they used to leave him, but if a weak person amongst them committed theft, they used to inflict the legal punishment on him. By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad, committed theft, Muhammad would cut off her hand!" [18]

This hadith illustrates that even if the Prophet's daughter had committed a crime, notwithstanding his position as the head of the Islamic state, he would have implemented the same criminal punishment upon his daughter without favour. Such approach is inimical to the rulers that litter the Muslim world today whereby the rulers, their families and their entourage enjoy unbridled favour and effectively operate above the law. This is a direct result of the absence of the shari'ah in the Muslim world.

There are detailed rules in Islam pertaining to the appointment of judges, the discussion of which is beyond the scope of this paper. However, let us again invoke the words of the second Khalifah of Islam, 'Umar bin al-Khattab (RA) when he outlined the attributes a judge requires in an Islamic court. He said, "The task of the judiciary is an undisputed obligation and a sunnah to be followed. Seek to comprehend when people have recourse to you, for it is no use to speak of a right if it is not put into effect. See that your face, your justice and your sitting are the same between people, such that the lord does not hope for your partiality, nor the weak despair of your justice..." [19]

These words of wisdom essentially outline the justice one can expect to see under Islam. The Khalifah or the judiciary have no room to depart from this boundary and will be accounted by the people if any departure from the rule of law is apparent to the citizens. The Umayyad Khalifah 'Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) once said "Rulers usually appoint people to watch over their subjects. I appoint you as a watcher over me and my behaviour. If you find me at fault in word or action guide me and stop me from doing it".

The judiciary is principally responsible for accounting state officials, including the Khalifah and his governors, in cases of wrongdoings. [20] The remit of such judges is wide enough to serve the purpose. Imam al-Mawardi maintains that such persons have the authority to investigate abuse of power by rulers against the ruled, and to hold them to account for the injustice they may have inflicted. Such powers may be invoked by the judges irrespective of whether or not the citizens complain against the official concerned. [21]

During the early Umayyad era, there were some incidence of official misconduct whereby the citizens were deprived of the rights they were entitled to. However, these were not tolerable in Islam and thus Khalifah 'Umar bin Abdul Aziz (RA) instituted formal procedures to investigate wrongdoings by officials, to the extent that he returned the goods that were seized by members of his tribe to their rightful owners. In the sight of 'Umar members of his tribe were no different from the citizens of the Islamic state whose rights were violated. As imam al-Mawardi recorded in his treatise, "he would reject all such wrong doing and would maintain respect for just and fair practices or re-establish such practices if necessary". [22] This practice of accounting state officials for abuse of power was carried out, in varying degrees, during the Abbasid era, for example, under al-Mahdi, al-Hadi, ar-Rashid, al-Ma'mun and al-Muhtadi.

The history of Islam contains abundant examples where abuse of power by state officials were investigated and remedied by judges. Such a judge may, amongst other matters, deal with:

1. abuse by tax officials, e.g., if they miscalculate the tax due from individuals and overtax. In such cases, the judge would order the return of the amount due back to the individual who overpaid;

2. allegations of deficiency, delay or negligence towards the payment of salaries of state employees who receive their salaries from the treasury. In such circumstances, the judge concerned would investigate and rectify any errors and ensure that their salaries are paid in a timely manner;

3. the restitution of private property seized unlawfully by state officials, even if he was a governor. The judge is obliged to investigate such allegations of seizure of property and effect restitution after conducting his investigation; and

4. unlawful seizure of property by one powerful individual from another due to his weakness. Upon investigating such complaints, restitution will be effected in accordance with the judge's findings.

The rule of law deficit in the West

The West has over the past few decades lectured countries around the world to institutionalise democracy, the rule of law, justice and equality. However, the USA and the UK have been exposed in recent years for not practising what they preach. For example, both the USA and the UK have been systematically involved in practices such as "extraordinary rendition", torture of terror suspects, indefinite detention without charge, unjust treatment of foreign nationals and intrusive spying on Muslims. As one American academic commented,

"Virtually every significant government security initiative implicating civil liberties – including penalizing speech, ethnic profiling, guilt by association, the use of administrative measures to avoid the safeguards of the criminal process, and preventive detention – has originated in a measure targeted at noncitizens". [23]

Yet, this deficit of the rule of law is not just limited to the above. In June 2007, it emerged that Tony Blair had pulled the plug off a major fraud investigation by the Serious Fraud Office against the British arms manufacturer BAE Systems. It was reported that BAE secretly paid £1 billion to Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia as "secret commission", thus effectively bribing the Saudis to place the largest defence contract worth £43 billion, known as the al-Yamamah deal. [24] It was allegedly in Britain's "national interest" to terminate this SFO investigation, thus sacrificing the rule of law under the pretext of Britain's oft-quoted "national interest".

Similarly, on the eve of Bill Clinton's departure from office, he pardoned 140 convicted criminals/fugitives. Those pardoned included US billionaire Marc Rich, who was at living abroad to avoid prosecution by US authorities. It was alleged that Marc Rich made handsome donations to the Democrats to secure the pardon. [25] This "cash for pardon deal" scandal raised many doubts over America's hollow claims that the US upholds rule of law. Needless to say, examples of abuse of power are quite common in the 21st century Wild West.

Conclusion

The above discourse evidently illustrates that the shari'ah has put in place all the ingredients necessary for establishing the rule of law, which is much needed in today's turbulent Muslim world. History is testament to the fact that Islam had established an enviable civilisation under its rule. There is no reason why this cannot return. On the other hand, the tired and baseless suggestion that only democracy is the way forward for Muslims is hardly foolproof. Western politicians must wake up to the slogan in Tahrir Square, ash-shab yurid isqat an-nizam (the people want to bring down the regime).

References

[1] Lord Goldsmith QC, "Government and the Rule of Law in the Modern Age", lecture given on 22 February 2006 (former British Attorney-General)

[2] Thomas Bingham, the Sixth Sir David Williams Lecture (lecture given in 2006), p-35

[3] Mark David Welton, Islam, the West, and the Rule of Law, 19 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 169 (2007), p-172

[4] Bingham, p-5

[5] By deploying a common definition in this discourse vis-à-vis the rule of law, this paper is not intended to be an appeasement to the critics of Islam. To the contrary, Muslims advocating the shari'ah believe that Islam is inherently superior to any man-made systems because Islam originated from the Creator and not from the minds of weak men.

[6] This article excludes any discussion of a legislature because such a body is incompatible with the Islamic political and legal philosophy.

[7] Imam al-Nawawi, Riyad us Salihin (National Hijra Council, 1992), hadith no-657

[8] Qur'an: 5-42

[9] Qur'an: 5-48

[10] Qur'an: 12-40

[11] Abu'l Hasan al Mawardi, Al-Ahkam As-Sultaniyyah (Ta-Ha Publications, London, 2005 reprint), p-10

[12] Welton, p-173

[13] Qur'an: 4-59

[14] Imam al-Nawawi, hadith no-664 (reported in Bukhari and Muslim)

[15] al-Mawardi, p-15-16

[16] ibid, p-21-22

[17] Taqiuddin an-Nabhani, the Ruling System in Islam (Nidham ul Hukm fil Islam) (Khilafah Publications, London), p-205

[18] Narrated in Bukhari and Muslim

[19] al-Mawardi, p-108

[20] This is comparable to the public law remedies that Western citizens often invoke against public authorities.

[21] al-Mawardi, p-121

[22] ibid, p-118

[23] Bingham, p-15

[24] The Guardian, 7 Jun 2007

[25] BBC News, 22 Feb 2001

the-islamic-khilafahthe-difference-between-the-sticking-to-principles-of-hizb-ut-tahrir-and-the-compromises-made-by-others

The newspaper 'Al-Masriyoon' published on 29/11/2011 the statements of the general guide (leader) of the 'Muslim Brotherhood' Dr Muhammad Badee' which he made in his weekly address when he said: "That the group was close to achieving its greater objective as specified by Imaam Hasan Al-Banna the founder of the group, and that is the establishment of the just and rightly guided ruling system, its institutions and elements which would comprise a government which would be followed by the rightly guided Khilafah and leadership of the world".

These statements stirred up outrage from the secularists in Egypt (those who have been battling to preserve the secular system in Egypt since the outset of the revolution on the 25th of January 2011 and who reject in a decisive manner any talk about there being an Islamic form of governance). As a result Dr Abdur Rahman Al-Barr (a member of the leadership council of the group) reacted to address what had resulted from the statements so he went about stripping away the content of the statements made by their leader in an attempt to please and satisfy the secularists and those who are behind them in terms of the western disbelieving states who have been frightened by the rise of the Islamic movement in Egypt and what has accompanied this rise in terms of calls being raised demanding the implementation of the rule by Islam via the Khilafah.

So Dr Al-Barr said according to what was published in the newspaper: 'Freedom and Justice' on the 05/01/2012: "The General Guide did not mean the Rightly guided Khilafah according to the traditional model where there exists a Khaleefah upon the head of the state who governs Wilaayahs (provinces) and other than that" but rather he meant: "That there would exist a unity between all of the Arab and Islamic states" considering the model presented in the organisation of Islamic co-operation and a model that can be developed and built upon!"

This is almost an exact repeat of what happened recently in Tunisia when Hamaadi Al-Jabaali (the number two in the Nahdah party) on the 13/11/2011 in the town of Souso talked about the coming of the sixth Khilafah which also provoked a wide debate in the Tunisian arena which led him to revise his words by being adamant that the words had been 'taken out of context' and added a message to reassure the opposing parties saying: "That the choice of the Nahdah party in terms of the ruling system is that it has chosen the democratic republican system which obtains its legitimacy from the people". And this speedy revision by Al-Jabaali of his statements opened the door for him to then become the forthcoming Prime Minister of Tunisia. This was followed by the statements from the head of the group Al-Ghanooshi who stated that Al-Jabaali would be the Tunisian Prime minister and not the head of the Othmani Khilafah.

And in the same light Doctor Rif'at As-Sa'eed wote on the web site: 'The poeple of Qur'aan' on the 07/01/2012 an article under the title: 'About the Khilafah and its delusions' in which he attempted in a manner lacking credibility to present a 'Sharee'ah understanding that negates the opinion that Islam has made the Khilafah its obligatory ystem of ruling. He used as evidence the views of Ash-Sharastaani, Al-Jarjaani, Al-Ghazaali and Al-Aamadi who said that the Khilafah is not part of the Usool (fundamentals) of the Aqaa'id (beliefs) as an argument to say that the Khilafah is not an obligation. And the Doctor is excused in this consideration of his because he is unable to distinguish between the subjects of Aqeedah (belief) and the subject of the Sharee'ah laws. So the proof for the obligation of the Khilafah is established upon the basis of the Sharee'ah rules in which the evidences from the Kitaab, Sunnah and Ijmaa' of the Sahaabah are many in number and firmly establish it as an obligation.

Therefore the place of the ruling in regards to the Khilafah is not within the realms of the subject of the Aqeedah. And I will now report what the Doctor himself reported from Al-Jarjaani in his book: 'Sharh Al-Mawaaqif' when he stated: "The Khilafah is not part of the fundamentals of the Diyaanaat and Aqaa'id but rather it is from the branches related to the actions of the Mukallafeen". This is because the Hukm Shar'i is the address of the legislator Subhaanahu related to the actions of the Mukallaf (legislatively responsible) servants whilst the Aqeedah is the decisive belief that is based on evidence and conforms to the reality.

And in relation to this Hizb-ut-Tahrir (whose name is synonymous in the Islamic arena with the Da'wah focused on the work to establish the Khilafah) has published a number of statements and leaflets which discuss the current situation in Egypt and have distributed these on a wide and challenging manner. The most recent was that which was issued on 06/01/2012 and it carried the title: "O People of Egypt: Is it necessary to experiment for more decades with a secular democratic state with an elected peoples assembly that holds no power or influence until you realise that the only way out for you is the establishment of the rightly guided Khilafah?!" and during the distribution of this leaflet to the people a group who had connections with the security services prevented its distribution pretending and claiming that they were from the Salafiyah whereas the true righteous Salafis are those who put the election of the Khaleefah as a priority over the burial of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم due to the greatness and gravity of the obligation. As for these, well, they prevented Ustaadh Ahmad Abu Daif a member of the Hizb from completing his distribution of a leaflet that was discussing the obligation of the Khilafah! And thereafter they handed him over to the police and then he was passed on to the prosecutors office which then cleared the way for his release and returned to him his leaflets.

And as a result of this incident which the newspapers described (falsely) as a violent confrontation between the Shabaab of the Hizb and some Salafis the satelite TV channel 'Dream 2' invited Ustaadh Muhammad Abdul Qawwiy the delegated founder of Hizb-ut-Tahrir in Egypt, Ustaadh Mahmoud At-Tarshooby and Ustaadh Ahmad Abu Daif (who had been involved in the incident) to attend the TV discussion show 'Al-Haqeeqah' which is presented by Ustaadh Waa'il Al-Ibraashi for a discussion which was meant to be between them alone so as to present an outline of the Hizb (its ideas and work etc...). And it seems that the subject of this episode changed overnight when the Shabaab of the Hizb were surprised by the appearance of additional previously unannounced guests who were invited in an attempt to undermine the idea of the Khilafah and provide a false image of the Hizb. They did this by inviting guests who were well known to reject the concept of Khilafah however their attempt and planning failed as the show resulted in producing a discussion within the Egyptian political arena and this was followed by a number of newspapers providing large spaces in their papers for articles containing information about Hizb-ut-Tahrir, its ideas and work.

When the TV programme introduced the show it read out a statement made by the ruling military council about Hizb-ut-Tahrir but they failed to read the response of the Hizb to this military statement which made clear that the Hizb is an international party that is working to unify the Muslim lands in the Islamic Khilafah state. However Al-Ibraashi (the host) neglected to mention this for some reason or another!

The guest Dr Abdur Raheem Ali used his turn to try and undermine the idea of Khilafah by stating that it is not Fard without presenting any Sharee'ah evidence to support his claim. Whereas the role of Dr Abdullah Bin Umar Abdur Rahman (May Allah free his father from the prisons of America, the land which leads the world in its war against the return of the Khilafah) was to focus on trying to give a false and misleading image of the Hizb by putting forward a number of fabrications and lies against the Hizb which he had extracted from a number of books which had been specifically written about the Hizb in the times of the past. The researcher carried these fabrications forward without scrutinizing their correctness and without evidence to support the claims. In particular he showed ignorance when he stated that we consider our Sheikh a Mujtahid Mutlaq whilst at the same time we say that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم was not a Mujtahid like our Sheikh. In doing so he made the issue a comparison between the capability of making Ijtihaad which is a strange and quite astonishing matter because how is it possible for him to interpret our statement: "It is not allowed in regards to the Messenger to be a Mujtahid" to mean that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم is not capable of performing Ijtihad whereas our Sheikh does have the capability?!

Dr Ibn Umar Abdur Rahman has confused the matter, whether this was out of ignorance or intentional. This is because Ijtihad allows the possibility of being wrong as well as being right and this is not permitted in relation to the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم who does not speak from his desire and does not say except what is correct. On the other hand it is permissible for our Sheikh and all Mujtahideen to perform Ijtihad and deduce rules which they believe to be correct whilst acknowledging the possibility of an error. He confused this issue making it a discussion comparing the capabilities in relation to the making Ijtihad so that the one listening would think that we have raised the level of our Sheikh higher than that of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم in regards to Ijtihad! How unfortunate this understanding would be.

Despite all of this there is no doubt that the Hizb benefited a great deal from this TV programme which participated in the breaking of the general blanketing that had been imposed upon the Hizb in Egypt previously. As such the news of the arrest of the Hizb member, his referal to the prosecuters office and his release after that was all mentioned within the news series whereas the arrest of 120 from Hizb-ut-Tahrir in 2002 did not get nearly as much coverage despite its much greater significance and despite 24 of them being presented to the courts and handed down sentences ranging between one and five years.

Verily Hizb-ut-Tahrir has held on firmly to its idea which it calls for in an unrivalled manner, bearing on its path all kinds of hardship and harrasment from the security apparatus, patient and anticipating the reward not fearing the blame of the blamers for the sake of Allah. It has continued as such until its name has become tied to the Khilafah and the Khilafah has become tied to it and it will remain as such by the permission of Allah until it achieves its goals through the resumption of the Islamic way of life via the establishment of the rightly guided Khilafah which the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم gave glad tidings of its return after the oppressive and tyrannical rule. And this is at the time when we see other Islamic movements making compromises one after the other so that they can reach the seat of ruling, so we ask what compromises will they be willing to make so that they can stay in the position of ruling!?

Allah سبحانه وتعالى says:

قُلْ هَٰذِهِ سَبِيلِي أَدْعُو إِلَى اللَّهِ ۚ عَلَىٰ بَصِيرَةٍ أَنَا وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَنِي

"And say this is my way I call to Allah upon awareness. Me and those who follow me." [Yousef, 108]

Sharif Zayid

Head of the media office of Hizb-ut-Tahrir – Wilayah of Egypt

The above is a draft translation from Arabic.

Original article: http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/info/index.php/contents/entry_16025

Egypt parliament holds first session since revolution

MONDAY, 23 JANUARY 2012 17:39
AFP

By Jailan Zayan

Islamist MPs took centre stage on Monday as Egypt's parliament met for the first time since a popular uprising ousted Hosni Mubarak, while their supporters massed outside to cheer the historic event.

A year after the uprising, many Egyptians see the new parliament as the first sign of democratic rule, in sharp contrast to the previous legislature dominated by Mubarak's party.

Egypt's first free parliamentary elections, which were held in phases between November and early January, saw Islamists clinch nearly three-quarters of the seats.

Outside the People's Assembly, hundreds of Islamist supporters had greeted the MPs as they entered the parliament, in scenes unimaginable just a year ago when most Islamist movements were banned.

And in their first act, the deputies in the lower house began voting for a speaker, with leading Muslim Brotherhood member Saad al-Katatni expected to win.

But the exact role of parliament remains unclear, with power remaining in the hands of the generals who took power from former president Mubarak.

"How can we read this oath when we don't even know if we will be a presidential system or a parliamentary system?" one MP asked during the swearing in.

Later, protesters set off for parliament from across Cairo to press deputies to implement the goals of the revolution, including an end to military trials of civilians, social justice and the trial of officials found guilty of abuse.

They were to join hundreds who were already chanting outside the parliament against the ruling military council and its chief Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, who served as Mubarak's defence minister for two decades.

The military has come under intense criticism in recent months for rights abuses and stifling dissent.

Activists accuse the generals of seeking to maintain political control despite assurances by the army that it will cede power to civilian rule when a president is elected in June.

The packed and sometimes chaotic first session was chaired by parliament's most senior member, Mahmud al-Saqqa of the liberal Wafd party.

The deputies were sworn in one by one, pledging to "preserve the safety of the nation and the interests of people and to respect the constitution and the law."

In a sign of the Islamists' increasing assertiveness, one ultra-conservative Islamist MP insisted on adding a religious reference to the oath.

When lawyer Mamduh Ismail took the microphone vowing to also "abide by the law of God," he was sharply rebuked by the chair, Saqqa.

"Please stick to the text," an angry Saqqa urged Ismail, asking him to repeat the oath several times. "Mr Ismail, my friend, please stand up and read the oath, and stick to the text."

Others tried to add "to protect the goals of the revolution" to the oath and received a similar rebuke, during the animated first session which saw several deputies don yellow sashes calling for "an end to military trials of civilians."

The long-banned Muslim Brotherhood won a crushing victory with 47.18 percent through its political arm, the Freedom and Justice Party.

The ultra-conservative Salafist Al-Nur party came second with 24.29 percent, with the liberal Wafd party finishing a distant third.

The liberal Egyptian Bloc -- which includes the Free Egyptians party of telecom magnate Naguib Sawiris who faces trial on allegations of insulting Islam -- came fourth with around seven percent.

The 508-member assembly was dissolved in February by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces that took power when Mubarak was forced to step down.

The Brotherhood, Egypt's best organised political grouping, had been widely expected to triumph in the polls but the surge by Al-Nur and high visibility of Salafi movements have raised fears about civil liberties and religious freedom.

Elections for parliament's upper house, the Shura Council, are to begin later this month and end in February. Then the two chambers will choose a 100-member panel to draft a new constitution.

Exclusive: How Pakistan helps the U.S. drone campaign

SUNDAY, 22 JANUARY 2012 19:02
Reuters

By Chris Allbritton

ISLAMABAD

(Reuters) - The death of a senior al Qaeda leader in a U.S. drone strike in Pakistan's tribal badlands, the first strike in almost two months, signaled that the U.S.-Pakistan intelligence partnership is still in operation despite political tensions.

The Jan 10 strike -- and its follow-up two days later -- were joint operations, a Pakistani security source based in the tribal areas told Reuters.

They made use of Pakistani "spotters" on the ground and demonstrated a level of coordination that both sides have sought to downplay since tensions erupted in January 2011 with the killing of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor in Lahore.

"Our working relationship is a bit different from our political relationship," the source told Reuters, requesting anonymity. "It's more productive."

U.S. and Pakistani sources told Reuters that the target of the Jan 10 attack was Aslam Awan, a Pakistani national from Abbottabad, the town where Osama bin Laden was killed last May by a U.S. commando team.

They said he was targeted in a strike by a U.S.-operated drone directed at what news reports said was a compound near the town of Miranshah in the border province of North Waziristan.

That strike broke an undeclared eight-week hiatus in attacks by the armed, unmanned drones that patrol the tribal areas and are a key weapon in U.S. President Barack Obama's counter-terrorism strategy.

The sources described Awan, also known by the nom-de-guerre Abdullah Khorasani, as a significant figure in the remaining core leadership of al Qaeda, which U.S. officials say has been sharply reduced by the drone campaign. Most of the drone attacks are conducted as part of a clandestine CIA operation.

The Pakistani source, who helped target Awan, could not confirm that he was killed, but the U.S. official said he was. European officials said Awan had spent time in London and had ties to British extremists before returning to Pakistan.

The source, who says he runs a network of spotters primarily in North and South Waziristan, described for the first time how U.S.-Pakistani cooperation on strikes works, with his Pakistani agents keeping close tabs on suspected militants and building a pattern of their movements and associations.

"We run a network of human intelligence sources," he said. "Separately, we monitor their cell and satellite phones.

"Thirdly, we run joint monitoring operations with our U.S. and UK friends," he added, noting that cooperation with British intelligence was also extensive.

Pakistani and U.S. intelligence officers, using their own sources, hash out a joint "priority of targets lists" in regular face-to-face meetings, he said.

"Al Qaeda is our top priority," he said.

He declined to say where the meetings take place.

Once a target is identified and "marked," his network coordinates with drone operators on the U.S. side. He said the United States bases drones outside Kabul, likely at Bagram airfield about 25 miles north of the capital.

From spotting to firing a missile "hardly takes about two to three hours," he said.

DRONE STRIKES A SORE POINT WITH PAKISTAN

It was impossible to verify the source's claims and American experts, who decline to discuss the drone program, say the Pakistanis' cooperation has been less helpful in the past.

U.S. officials have complained that when information on drone strikes was shared with the Pakistanis beforehand, the targets were often tipped off, allowing them to escape.

Drone strikes have been a sore point with the public and Pakistani politicians, who describe them as violations of sovereignty that produce unacceptable civilian casualties.

The last strike before January had been on Nov 16, 10 days before 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed in what NATO says was an inadvertent cross-border attack on a Pakistani border post.

That incident sent U.S.-Pakistan relations into the deepest crisis since Islamabad joined the U.S.-led war on militancy following the Sept 11, 2001 attacks. On Thursday, Pakistani foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar said ties were "on hold" while Pakistan completes a review of the alliance.

The United States sees Pakistan as critical to its efforts to wind down the war in Afghanistan, where U.S.-led NATO forces are battling a Taliban insurgency.

Some U.S. and Pakistani officials say that both sides are trying to improve ties. As part of this process, a U.S. official said, it is possible that some permanent changes could be made in the drone program which could slow the pace of attacks.

The security source said very few innocent people had been killed in the strikes. When a militant takes shelter in a house or compound which is then bombed, "the ones who are harboring him, they are equally responsible," he said.

"When they stay at a host house, they (the hosts) obviously have sympathies for these guys."

He denied that Pakistan helped target civilians.

"If ... others say innocents have been targeted, it's not true," he said. "We never target civilians or innocents."

The New America Foundation policy institute says that of 283 reported strikes from 2004 to Nov 16, 2011, between 1,717 and 2,680 people were killed. Between 293 and 471 were thought to be civilians -- approximately 17 percent of those killed.

The Brookings Institution, however, says civilian deaths are high, reporting in 2009 that "for every militant killed, 10 or more civilians also died." Pakistan's interior minister, Rehman Malik, also said in April 2011 that "the majority of victims are innocent civilians."

Still, despite its public stance, Pakistan has quietly supported the drone program since Obama ramped up air strikes when he took office in 2009 and even asked for more flights.

According to a U.S. State Department cable published by anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks, Pakistan's chief of army staff General Ashfaq Kayani in February 2008 asked Admiral William J. Fallon, then-commander of U.S. Central Command, for increased surveillance and round-the-clock drone coverage over North and South Waziristan.

The security source said Pakistan's powerful spy agency, the Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, also was supportive of the strikes, albeit privately.

(Additional reporting by Mark Hosenball in Washington; Editing by Ron Popeski)

Palestine – Central To The Arab Uprisings And Islamic Awakenings

Wednesday, January 11th, 2012 |Posted by Noor

There was an unmistakable hint of triumph in the comments made by Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister of the elected Hamas government in Gaza when he was hosted by Mohammed Badie, chairman of the Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood.

Both leaders said what would be expected of them under these circumstances. Haniyeh asserted that his movement’s “presence with the Brotherhood threatens the Israeli entity,” and Badie reaffirmed the Brotherhood’s commitment to “issues of liberation, foremost the Palestinian issue.”

It is very telling that Haniyeh’s first official visit outside Gaza as prime minister was to Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood headquarters in Cairo’s Moqattam district. He shared his message — of resistance against Israeli occupation, national unity with rival Fatah and reaching out to Muslim countries — and then resumed his regional tour.

Since 2006, Hamas has attempted, but largely failed to win the approval of governments in Muslim-majority countries. Muslim solidarity was the thrust of Hamas’ foreign policy aimed at lessening Palestinian political and financial dependence on the US and other Western governments. It failed because, as it turned out, US financial and political leverage is too overpowering and far-reaching for a relatively small movement like Hamas to single handedly challenge. But, as Haniyeh himself reiterated, times are changing

In the first and second rounds of Egyptian elections, the Brotherhood’s newly created Freedom and Justice party won more than 35 percent of the vote. The electoral success was hardly an anomaly. The Islamic Nahda party, which formed the first post-revolutionary government in Tunisia, won more than 40 percent of the vote last October. Morocco’s Justice and Development party won the November elections and the Islamic leaning of Libya’s new political set up is all too palpable. There have been marks of Islamic political influence in other countries across the region.

The reformation of the political landscape in the Arab region has tempted many to infer polarizing, if not frightening conclusions. Israeli Army Home Front Command Chief Maj. Gen. Eyal Eisenberg was one of the first in Israel to refer to these developments as an Arab Spring turning into a “radical Islamic winter”. He said, “This leads us to the conclusion that through a long-term process, the likelihood of an all-out war is increasingly growing.”

However, what truly worries Israel is not the radicalization of Muslim societies, but the rise of Islamic politics to represent a rational, mainstream political discourse. It threatens Israel because it rallies many Arabs around one cohesive political agenda, and repositions Palestine, once more, as central to what many Muslim intellectuals refer to as the “Islamic Awakening.”

Israeli fear mongering aside, the US — Israel’s main benefactor — must find ways to co-exist with the new political arrangement. Other Western governments too “will have to adapt to a power shift they have long sought to prevent,” wrote Roula Khalaf and Heba Saleh in the Financial Times (Dec. 28).

For Israel, however, the transformation in regional politics will prove unbearable. It is not Tunisia’s Nahda party that Israel is most concerned about, of course; it is Hamas. This is partly what compelled Haniyeh to venture out of Gaza. As the US is hoping to control, if not manage, the rise of Islamic parties, Hamas aims at ensuring a primary position for Palestine — as seen through the prism of the Islamic movement — in the region’s new political landscape.

There is little doubt that Hamas’ rise to political prominence in 2006, and the numerous subsequent attempts at isolating and destroying it will influence new Islamic parties in various Arab countries. Hamas’ ability to survive has certainly registered among new Muslim politicians in Egypt and elsewhere. Now, with the early fruits of the Egyptian revolution being plucked by Islamic parties, Hamas is guardedly making its move. Hamas is a “jihadi movement of the Brotherhood with a Palestinian face,” said Haniyeh in Cairo.

A quick look at the roots of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine shows that Haniyeh was hardly exaggerating. Since the Society of the Muslim Brotherhood was founded in Ismailiyya, Egypt, in 1928 by Hasan Al-Banna and a few others, it quickly found in Palestine a rally cry to unite Muslims through the entire region. The first link between the movement and Palestine was formed in 1935, when Abd Al-Rahman Al-Banna (the founder’s brother) visited Palestine and met with the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin Al-Husseini.

The Brotherhood became visible during the revolt of 1936, as they communicated the Palestinian message with an Islamic tone to the rest of the Arab world. The cause of Palestine promptly became the central mission and calling of the Brotherhood, as Hasan Al-Banna himself headed the newly founded General Central Committee to Aid Palestine.

More, in April 1948, when most Arab governments delayed in partaking in the defense of Palestine, the Muslim Brotherhood deployed three battalions of volunteers.

Estimates of the number of Brotherhood volunteers in Palestine during the war and the subsequent Nakba vary, but Hasan Al-Banna himself noted, in March 1948, that the movement had approximately 1,500 volunteers in Palestine.

The relationship between the Brotherhood and Palestine had it ebbs and flows, but the rapport was never completely severed. Even before Hamas was officially established 1987, the movement functioned under various classifications, all directly affiliated with Egypt’s Brotherhood.

The recent Cairo meeting between Haniyeh and Badie could be understood within that historical context, representing a triumphant reunion and possibly open coordination. This would once again rejuvenate the Brotherhood’s Palestine connection, and grant Hamas greater political leverage — after years of isolation, and despite the current political turmoil in the region.

Of course, Hamas’ challenges are many and growing. Leading among them is Israel’s violent escalation in Gaza, and the unremitting US pressure. Still, it is expected that Hamas’ political message and outlook will continue to find balance between Palestinian exceptionality and the more inclusive Arab and Islamic framework.

By venturing out of Gaza, Haniyeh is hoping to expand the diameters of the Palestinian Islamic movement into Egypt and beyond — thus reclaiming what Hamas once considered “the strategic depth” of the Palestinian cause. While such a push failed to attain its objectives in 2006, 2012 is a brand new year.

Ramzy Baroud (www.ramzybaroud.net) is an internationally-syndicated columnist and the editor of PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza’s Untold Story (Pluto Press, London).

source : newcivilisation