DEMOCRACY AND MUSLIM PARTICIPATION IN THE ELECTIONS

Aldymuqrattyt Wamusharakat Almuslim Fi Alantikhabat

A research presented to the Islamic Fiqh Academy of the Muslim World League in its nineteenth session held in Makkah Al-Mukarramah from 22 to 27 Shawwal 1428 AH corresponding to 3 to 8 October 2007 CE, and was published with a group of other jurisprudential research in a book entitled (A Collection of Contemporary Jurisprudence Research).

1-  Introduction and Research Methodology

(Democracy) has become at the present time a slogan for a specific system of government that aims to achieve the people's rule by itself through its representatives who elect them by providing the requirements and requirements of this rule such as respecting the freedoms, public and political rights of individuals, freedom of assembly, opinion, and formation of parties ... etc., hence the correlation between democracy And elections that are required and required by democracy. Before talking about the participation of Muslims in these elections that democracy requires, it is necessary to talk about democracy itself by stating its meaning and concept in legal terms, then explaining its characteristics, types and applications in reality, the position of the elections in it, the criticism directed at it and what its supporters said in defending it, then follow This is by explaining the rule of Islam in it, and the ruling on Muslim participation in elections held by governments that adopt the democratic system.

Chapter One:  Defining democracy, explaining how it emerged, stating its characteristics and the importance of elections in it, and what was said about its defects, apologizing for these defects and responding to the critics of democracy.

Chapter Two:  Explaining the rule of Islam in democracy.

Chapter Three: The  Muslim’s Participation in the Democratic Elections That Are Conducted by Islamic and Non-Muslim Countries.

Chapter Four: The  Muslim’s participation in the elections in a party that does not have the power to enact laws and regulations.

Chapter 1

Definition of democracy and what is related to it

The first topic

Definition of democracy and a statement of its inception

2  -  Defining democracy

The word democracy has its origins in Greek - Greek - as it consists of two words: ( Demos ), meaning people, and Krates , which means power. So the origin of the meaning of democracy is (the authority of the people).

And democracy in the terminology at the present time also indicates this meaning, as it means "the rule of the people," meaning that the people alone have the right to exercise power in the state as the sovereign in it.

3  - The  emergence of democracy

Democracy remained a mere theoretical idea and it did not become a formal principle of government except with the influence and action of the French Revolution in 1789 AD, which brought democracy from being a theoretical idea to a realistic reality, that is, from the space of saying into practice, as this revolution made the democratic principle based on the rule of the people the basis for governance The peoples, in which the Declaration of Rights stipulated, “All sovereignty is concentrated in the nation - the people - and no organization or anyone can use power“ the nation was not its source. ”On France, other countries took this principle - democracy - which quickly became a sweeping current in various countries.

4  -  Characteristics of democracy

The democracy that the French Revolution transformed from a mere theoretical idea to a concrete reality. This democracy is known in the jurisprudence of constitutional law and in the field of politics as "traditional democracy" or "Western traditional democracy" or "political democracy" and this democracy, with its multiple names that we have mentioned, has a number of characteristics We mention them or mention the most important ones as follows:

     First: the first characteristic

The first and fundamental characteristic of traditional democracy is that it is based on the belief that the people alone are sovereign and sovereign, and that any authority in the state that is not based on the nation’s sovereignty and authority is an illegitimate authority.

     Second: the second characteristic

It is a political doctrine related to governance, and it is not a social or economic doctrine concerned with reforming society from a material point of view.

     Third: the third characteristic

It determines the equality of individuals in political rights, the most important of which is the right to vote, as a result of the fact that this democracy - i.e. traditional - views individuals as human beings and determines these rights for them on the basis of this perception of them regardless of the interests they represent, the unions to which they belong, or the competencies they are They enjoy it, or the jobs they occupy, because as long as individuals are equal in human beings, this equality requires saying that they are equal in political rights, including the right to vote.

     Fourth: the fourth characteristic

It is concerned with the rights and general freedoms of individuals and establishes the necessary protection for them and prevents their detraction or burglary. While it is concerned with these public rights and freedoms of individuals, it seeks to reconcile it with the requirements of the public good, and this praiseworthy endeavor in this reconciliation is carried out under the effective control of public opinion, which can only be achieved by respecting the rights and public freedoms of individuals such as their right to express opinion in speech and writing, and their right to The formation of political parties and their right to the state guaranteeing their personal freedoms in souls and to come assured of their lives and freedoms, ... etc. Effective oversight of public opinion cannot be achieved in a country where these rights and freedoms of individuals are violated.

     Fifth: Traditional democracy has a social character

We said that the traditional democracy that arose and emerged as a result of the French Revolution is a political doctrine that seeks to achieve the people's exercise of governance by determining political equality between individuals and their equality with regard to governance and managing its public affairs.

As for the social democracy that emerged after the emergence of traditional democracy, what is meant by the equality that you want to achieve among individuals is social equality, which is equality not in terms of the people taking over the management of public affairs and their participation in governance, but in terms of achieving the greatest possible amount of material equality between individuals. With this big difference between the two democracies, traditional democracy is expanding to adopt principles of a social and economic nature. That is why we see many countries that adopt traditional democracy tend to adopt some of the aspects and meanings of social democracy, including the determination of the right to work for the individual according to his choice, his freedom to join trade unions, and his right to The strike and its right to guarantee the state in case of poverty and destitution due to the reason of his inability to work due to old age, disease, lack of work opportunities, and so on, which helps to provide a minimum decent living for citizens, which brings them closer to the social equality that is concerned with social democracy.

The second topic

Democracy application photos

5-  We said that traditional democracy means the rule of the people, that is, the rule of the people by the people, meaning that he alone has the right to exercise power within the state, except that he may exercise the affairs of this power himself directly and this is direct democracy. He may exercise power through his representatives whom he chooses to exercise power on his behalf and in his name, and this is representative democracy. He may exercise direct power through a partnership between himself and his deputies on important issues, and this is semi-direct democracy. Thus , traditional democracy -  political - divided in terms of the extent and how people practice his authority into three sections: direct democracy and representative democracy and democratic semi - direct.

 6-  First: direct democracy

This term is termed a democratic system in which the people themselves assume all aspects of sovereignty and power. This is achieved through the gathering of citizens who have the right to exercise political rights in the form of a popular assembly who themselves acknowledge laws and choose employees to implement them and to adjudicate judicial disputes, meaning that the requirement for direct democracy is for the people to assume by themselves the three powers: legislative, executive, and judicial, but directly this type of democracy at the time. The present is almost impossible.

7-  Second: semi-direct democracy

This democracy is considered a mediating system between direct democracy and indirect "representative" democracy. Under the requirements of this democracy, the people participate with their representatives, who have been chosen by them, in assuming some manifestations of power and some public affairs that are mostly limited to legislative affairs. Among the manifestations of this semi-direct democracy is the popular referendum on a law approved by Parliament, which is presented to the people for approval or rejection.

8-  Third: Representative Democracy

In this democracy, the people do not directly exercise their authority to govern and manage the country's public affairs. That is, the people do not govern themselves directly, as is the case in direct democracy, but rather govern themselves through their representatives whom they choose to exercise power and rule on their behalf and in their name. This type of democracy did not appear except as a social necessity for the inability to implement direct democracy. Representative democracy was the best thing that could be done in reality to achieve the meaning of democracy, which means the rule of the people, but in this democracy by its representatives.

9-  Elections are a prerequisite for implementing democracy

We said that the emergence of representative democracy was one of the necessities to implement traditional - political - democracy that means the rule of the people, because it was impossible to implement direct democracy and representative democracy based on election - the election of the people to their representatives - so that they exercise power on behalf of the people, and hence the election was of great importance in implementing democracy Indirect, and from here also the need to organize the election and its related matters.

10  -  Organizing the election and its belongings

And if indirect democracy is based on the people electing their representatives who exercise power on their behalf, then this necessitated organizing the election and its implications by stating who has the right to vote, how to conduct this election, and other requirements for organizing the election. Among the aspects of organizing the election is the setting of conditions for who has the right to vote.

   The first condition: that he enjoys the nationality of the state. The right to vote is limited to citizens of the country, and is prohibited from foreigners.

   The second condition: masculinity. This is a condition for whoever has the right to vote, and this condition was common in the past among countries, but it is mostly in countries at the present time that the male voter is not required as long as he holds the nationality of the state, so women have become like men in the right to vote.

   The third condition: attaining a certain age. Countries usually require a certain age to enjoy the right to vote, and states differ in determining this age, but the meaning from which it starts is choosing the age that is suitable as a presumption for the citizen to reach the ability to use the right to vote in a satisfactory manner. Some countries set the minimum age at 18 years, and some make this age limit more or less. The Islamic Republic of Iran recently made the minimum age for voters to reach 15 years, as the age of puberty, which is the legal mandate.

   The fourth condition: conventional validity

The voter is required to be free from mental illnesses, such as insanity, and what may affect his status. If the mentally ill is cured, his right to vote is returned to him if his prohibition against voting was due to his mental illness, and the impediment has disappeared, and his illness has been forbidden, and he is entitled to vote.

   The fifth condition: moral and ethical validity.

That the voter has not been subject to criminal judgments for crimes involving dishonor, or a ruling was issued against him denying him the enjoyment of civil and political rights.

11-  How to conduct the election

What is meant by the election is the election of the people's representatives by those who have the right to vote, and this election is held for this purpose either directly or indirectly. One-degree election. As for indirect elections, the voters choose people to represent them in choosing the representatives (members of parliament).

The third topic

Criticism of democracy by stating its flaws

12-   First: Democracy is not the rule of the people

Democracy is defined as the government of the people, meaning that the people themselves take charge of the affairs of power, and this necessitates that all members of the people undertake the work of power and agree on the decisions they issue related to state affairs, and this is impossible and even impossible, and this is what Jean-Jacques Rousseau realized. He admitted that democracy in its previous meaning, that is, it means the rule of the people, which has no way of achieving it, and therefore he adopted the idea of ​​(the government of the majority of the people) and accordingly, the saying that democracy means the rule of the people, this saying is in fact an abbreviation of the phrase "the government of the majority of the people" and this is the meaning of democracy You really mean it.

13 -  Second: Democracy does not achieve the rule of the majority of the people

Upon scrutiny and reflection, it appears that democracy not only does not achieve the rule of the people, it does not achieve the rule of its majority, but rather the rule of its minority, and to clarify this seemingly strange fact, we show the following:

The majority of the people who assume power and rule on behalf of the nation are represented by the elected representatives, but the election does not show us who represents the majority of the people for the following reasons:

   A   - All members of the people do not participate in the election - the election of the nation’s representatives - but a portion of them are the ones who have the right to vote and who meet the requirements of the voter. As for those who do not meet the requirements of the voter, they do not participate in the election like the one who has not reached the age required by the law to exercise the right to vote.

     B -  Also, the reality is that not all of those who have the right to vote do not participate in the election, but some of them participate in the election, so the number of direct voters remains less than the number of those who have the right to vote.

     C-  Moreover, the election winners are those who won the most votes, so those who did not win the majority of votes will fall out of the number of participants, and this result leads to the fact that the elected parliament does not in fact represent the majority of the people but rather a minority of it.

   D -   Then the meetings of the Council of Representatives (Parliament) are valid when most of the members of the House attend, that is, by the presence of half of them plus one.

     E - Then the decisions of (Parliament) are usually valid and enforceable with the approval of the absolute majority of the representatives present, that is, with the presence of half of them plus one. The final result is the issuance of enforceable laws that are supposed to represent the nation or its majority because it is issued by its representatives, which are in fact nothing but decisions of a small minority of the nation and are not the decisions of the nation or the decisions of the majority of them. How we mentioned.

14-  Third: The nation’s representatives do not express the nation’s interests nor do they represent it

It is assumed in the representative democratic system that the representative represents the nation and expresses its interests and what it wants, but the reality is otherwise. Mostly, the representative is subject to the will of the voters in his electoral district who elected him, so he is in line with their desires and what they want, even if that is at the expense of the nation’s interests, hoping to re-elect him . Thus, representatives become representatives of different interests, which are the interests of those who elected them and not the public interests of the nation, and with this approach, they cannot in fact be considered representatives of the nation and use its authority on its behalf and to achieve its interests, because the true prosecution is the one whose owner is keen on the interest of his delegates.

15-   Fourth: the impact of political parties

The political parties have a great effect on distorting the nation’s representation and expressing what it wants, because affiliation with the parties wastes the will of the member of the party as it submits to his will, whether it represents the nation’s interest or not.

16-  Fifth: Democracy diminishes the competencies

It gives the right to vote for those unable to know who is fit to represent the nation, and even if they have the ability to do so, they submit to the will of the party to which they belong, so they elect those whom the party orders to elect them even if they are not fit to represent the nation. And what adds to the seriousness of this matter that we have mentioned is that the parliament has the right not only to legislate laws, but to take over the government by forming the cabinet from these majority, which mostly belongs to one party, and then the matter becomes more dangerous because the ministry, which is made up of the majority of parliamentarians, distributes its ministerial portfolios. On the basis of specialization, but on the basis of the party’s opinion and what it intends in this distribution, and on this it is permissible to assign the Ministry of Transport to a deputy who is a doctor, and in such formulas weakening the official’s control over his subordinates, and the minister's inability to know the requirements of his ministry in a manner that achieves the interests of the nation.

17-  Sixth: Political equality does not achieve de facto equality

Representative democracy gives the right to vote equally among those who meet the conditions for voting without regard or consideration for its efficiency, it gives everyone who has the right to vote one vote and thus equality between the ignorant and the scientist, since each of them has one vote, and thus someone who is not fit for representation in the nation may reach Parliament. Nor does the representation of its interests because an ignorant voter is not like the world voter, it is better to elect qualified people on behalf of the nation. Especially since most of the voters are below the level of knowledge of a competent representative.

18-  Seventh: The appearance of democracy other than its informant

Democracy has a great capacity for deception and deception as it shows unrealistic manifestations of concern for the rule of the people and their interests, and among these manifestations is the declaration that it achieves the rule of the people by the people, and that it achieves this by electing the people to represent them in using their authority to achieve their interests. They arrive in Parliament that does not represent the people or its majority, and that its decisions and laws that it legislates in the name of the people, in fact, represent an opinion that I turn over from the MPs, and therefore these decisions and laws do not represent the will of the people nor its majority, but the people are deceived by the slogans of democracy, so they accept it and defend it and think that it is achieved by the people His sovereignty and authority.

And if the people do not directly achieve their sovereignty or authority, it can be achieved for them in the form of their representatives. Democracy, as some have said about it, is "dangerous because it puts gold paint on the handcuffs that tie the people, making them less inclined to revolt and revolt against the restrictions of the existing system."

19-  Democracy’s supporters responded to its opponents

Democracy has its supporters, and it has some of the ideas on which it is based that give it a strong support, and its supporters refute the arguments of its critics. In a manner acceptable and acceptable in terms of the sentence, among the things they said in their attack on the opponents of democracy and the justifications they said for the presence of some defects and contradictions, we mention the following:

     First: If the opponents of democracy say that it is not the ideal intended in governance, the answer is this required perfection is not present in anti-democratic regimes such as dictatorship, for example.

     Second: Democracy, like any system created by mankind, cannot reach absolute perfection and infallibility from every defect, but its faults are less and easier than the faults of the opposing and opposing regimes, and the advantages of democracy are clearer and clearer and more than the advantages of other regimes opposed to it, if it has any of the real advantages that Souls look forward to.

     Third: The rule must be for the nation because the government exists to serve the interests of this nation, regardless of the form of government. Therefore, it is logically necessary for the people to initiate the ruling by themselves. If it is really impossible for him to do so, then he may initiate the ruling through his representatives whom he chooses. Thus the ruling is homogeneous, he is from the people And to him.

     Fourth: In the accepted and accepted axioms that every rational person personally administers his affairs, without that wasting his humanity, and on this basis the people should personally manage their affairs.

    Fifthly: The rapprochement of peoples with one another through the exchange of experiences and the means of governing them, and the serious transfer among its members in their various countries and knowledge of their conditions, all of this leads to their acceptance of democracy and their acceptance of it and their refusal to fall under the tutelage of others under the pretext of their inability to take over their affairs themselves, And this tendency in them is strengthened by the inability of any government to survive and continue without the consent of the people and rule in its name and to achieve its material and moral interests, freedom of all kinds that cannot be abandoned by a person, otherwise he will abandon his humanity. Therefore all of this it was better to actually adopt democratic rule because it is the only type of government that can be stable at the time. the present.

     Sixth: For all of what we have mentioned and others that we have not mentioned, democracy - whether its opponents are satisfied or not - imposes its existence in a way that cannot be denied or overlooked. The evidence for this is that every regime opposed to democracy whose men soon come to this fact about democracy and the popularity The peoples are against it, and therefore they strive to gain the people's sympathy and satisfaction, and this includes their surrender of the people's authority and their sense of the sweeping influence of democracy.

     Seventh: In summary, although democracy has not truly reached the required degree of perfection, it is nevertheless the closest known positivist system to the desired perfection.

Chapter II

Islam rule in democracy

20 -  Islam has its rule in everything and in every event  , so it is not surprising that it has its rule in democracy, and this ruling is only proven for democracy based on its constituents and truth, as democracy has foundations, an intellectual basis and necessary requirements, so it is not correct to give a general ruling to it by permitting, deploring or prohibiting And other legal rulings, in an absolute manner without detailing based on the name of democracy without looking closely at its reality and its constituents because the meaning is always for names and not for names, and on this basis we explain the legitimate rule of democracy based on its constituents and intellectual basis, so I say:

21-  First: In terms of its intellectual basis

Jurists and those concerned with researching democracy and its origins in theory and practice say that the principle of "the sovereignty of the nation" is the legal and intellectual basis for democracy and they also say about this sovereignty of the nation: that it basically means that it is a genuine authority that does not derive its existence from another side, and it is an authority in practice that is not punishable. It is unmatched. It is (the right to command) that authorizes its owner to issue binding orders and establishes the principle of “the sovereignty of the nation,” meaning that the ummah is the one to exercise this authority of command .. and they say about the characteristics of the nation’s sovereignty that it is one and indivisible. In a particular state there is only one supreme authority for it. One administration is the authority of the nation that is sovereign, and they also say in the descriptions of the nation’s sovereignty that it is inalienable to it, so that the ummah cannot relinquish from it or part of it because the authority of the command that is the essence of sovereignty is due to the general will - the will of the nation -  The will cannot be transferred because - as Rousseau says - it perishes by its transmission .

22-  What we have mentioned is the intellectual basis of democracy, and it  is a void basis by virtue of the Sharia, and it is not permissible to believe or tolerate it   by making it one of the jurisprudential matters that may be adopted or considered probable and not preponderant. Because what is determined by the principle of (the sovereignty of the nation) is an explicit disbelief because it makes the nation the authority of the command and the prohibition, and not God, the Most High, and makes the ummah the supreme authority that is neither punished nor authority over it and that it did not derive this authority from others. Moreover, this principle closes the door to (the ummah) if it wants to repent to its sanity and repent to God, as the holders of a theory or principle (the nation’s sovereignty) decide that “sovereignty - that is, the nation’s sovereignty - is not disposable of it, so the ummah cannot relinquish it or from Part of it. " As for the evidences for the invalidity of the principle of sovereignty, the inviolability of belief or its procrastination, there is a great deal of it, including the following:

   1.  The governance in Islam any right to issue commands and prohibitions to people is to God alone, and God 's commands and prohibitions that represent what God has prescribed for people and ordered His Messenger Muhammad ﷺto inform people and apply them without the other is  not permissible in the doctrine of Islam dispute God in this governance



- issue the right commands And the prohibitions - nor his participation in this right, and the verses in this area are many, including the following:

        A-  Judgment is for God alone and his judgment is not punished.

      The Almighty said: “Judgment is only for God.

      And the Almighty said (He does not have judgment, and He is the fastest of calculators).

      And the Almighty said (Indeed, wisdom is only to God - He commanded that you worship only Him).

      And the Almighty said: (And God judges, there is no reason for his judgment).

        B - And  that the matter is for God alone and not for anyone else.

      The Almighty said: “He does not have the creation and the command God bless the Lord of the worlds.”

      The Almighty said (They say: "Do we have from the matter? Say that the matter is all for God."

        C- And  that the Messengers and the believers carry out the command of God.

      He convey about Jesus peace be upon him (what I told them only what ordered me to do that worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord) said, Come Addressing messenger, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ(Say but ordered that the worship of God and share with him) and the Almighty said, addressing the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ(and upright as ordered not follow their desires) and the Almighty said believers (and what was a believer and no believer if Allah and His Messenger is to have the good of the ordered) and the Almighty said (only saying believers when they are called to Allah and His Messenger to judge between them to say we have heard and obey).

        D -    God has no partner in his wisdom, command and law.

      The Almighty said (Do they have partners who have prescribed for them from religion that which God has not authorized).

      And the Almighty said (They do not have a guardian without him, and he does not participate in his judgment).

      E - That the Messenger and the ummah are required to follow the revealed law of God.

      The Almighty said: (Follow what was revealed to you from your Lord, and do not follow guardians without it).

      And the Almighty said, addressing His Messenger, ﷺAnd an order for him to follow His law. “The command is for him to do that for his nation. Islam was because of its command of good, which is what God commanded, and its prohibition of evil, which is what God forbade. The well-known is all that God has commanded, and the objectionable is all that God forbids.

        And -  the applicable law is what God has prescribed

      The Almighty said (And that I judge among them by what God has revealed, and do not follow their whims). That is why he who does not judge by the law of God is considered an infidel, wrongdoer and an adulterer. The Almighty said (And whoever does not judge by what God has revealed, those are the disbelievers). (And whoever does not judge by what God has revealed, they are the unjust.) (And whoever does not judge by what God has revealed, those are the ones who are immoral).

        G-  God's law is the reference when conflict

_PRINTER