Samatar's five points for solution

[Ibtisam]

From what i understand a formalized Islamic political system has a slighty different foundation, including the two core concepts of Tawhid (oneness of allah and Khilafat (encompassing three main elements ofthe caliphate, Sultan and ulama.) on top of this there is consultation (shura), consensus (ijma), and independent interpretative judgment (ijtihad). Other than that Islam and democracy are not that different, the prinicples are the same, with same goals. Prove me wrong JB, we can adopt democracy as long as we encompass these basic foundations to it.

 

JB: if you don't like the word democracy, how about Modernization?

[Jacaylbaro]

loool yeah we can give any name but democracy ,,,

 

I don't think Islam and democracy have the same principles and goals.

 

The objective of the islam is to spread the religion and expand it to the other people ,, it is to please Allah and follow the Quran whateva it takes. All those systems and governmental personnel are working for that purpose even if it is against the majority of the population.

 

The objective of democracy is to please the people specially the majority even if it is against the principles of the Islam. They don't want to impose the Hijab on women if the majority doesn't want it.

 

 

THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE IF YOU GOT WHAT I MEAN

[Ibtisam]

^^You are mixing things up, there is a difference between Islam and Political Islamic system. A political Islamic system just aims to govern without offending or contradicting Islamic values and principles, and at the same time create a system where by the Muslims can advance, improve, seek justice etc. It is a component of Islam if you like. Islam as a religion to be followed, spread etc, will be up to an institution to do, not on a government level.

 

As for your second point, you are creating a conflict between the idea of rule by the majority, with individual right.The rule by the majority comes after your personal right (to do as you please as long as you do not harm anyone in the process).

[Jacaylbaro]

Ok ,, here comes the difference ,, now i can clearly see where you are coming from.

 

Islam as a religion to be followed, spread etc, will be up to an institution to do, not on a government level.

In the Islamic government the government is responsible to spread, protect, and run the religion. Yes, some institutions can be created to be responsible some tasks like the Zakah but the overall responsibility of the religion falls on the government.

 

If anyone abuse the Shariah it is the government to take action against him/her.

[Ibtisam]

^^^Nope, that is where you are wrong again, it is for the government to set up the means/ institutions to enable this, and may even have to allocate funds for it. It is not the government role to take action against an individuals who break the law or offend shariah, this will create an over lap of power/ abuse etc. There is the courts/ laws etc to deal with these kind of things. It is also government role and responsibility to create laws that protect minorities, non Muslims etc, and ensure all these institutions and branches are effectively running independent of each other, based on justice. This is also the role of a democratic government nooh?

 

What I am saying is that democracy can be used as means or a mechanism thorough which the sharia can be applied, the frame work of democracy is wide enought to allow this and Islam does not advocate complete rule by religious hierarchy, hence we have the freedom to adopt whatever political system is working.

[Sophist]

Salaams,

 

Okay some clarifications are needed.

 

1. There is a DIFFERENCE between Democracy and elections.

 

Most people mistake between the two; democracy is an idea (a sort of government; or an order to organise society) whereas elections are just instruments.

 

In Greek, the word is demos-kratia, the rule by the people; this goes against the grain of Islamic spirit. In Islam, it is the Rule by Allah. As such, people execute ordained hukums rather than occupying the legislative seat if you will.

 

However, elections (as to who will execute these rules) do not contravene with Islam-- though who will participate is a debate for the Uluma.

 

That is my two cents!.

[Emperor]

^Good points

[Xargaga]

The Ulemas could play the rol e of judiciary with all powers of interpreting and reviewing the Sharia laws through a framed constitution, based on the Qura'aan and sunnah. There also should be in place either unicameral or bicameral house of legislature,with men who are learned in both religion and other academic field. These representatives should come by election and through a registered parties, whose mandate would be but not limited to formulation of laws and laws and all governing policies within the constitutional provisions and,in consultation with the Judiciary.The executive should consist of of a president and vice president with a high moral standards and learned in religious matters.The Executive would also be elected at intervals and should run on party tickets.The Executive role would be to consent to the bills passed by the legislature, also implement and enforce the laws and regulations with powers granted by the constitution, including the special executive powers. They are otherwise free to go by a formulated partisan process and procedures unless declared unconstitutional by the Judiciary.

 

As for this to be posible.There should take place, a historic convention of Somali Ulemas,Elite groups and traditional elders, from all warring groups. And in concesus frame the Islamic based constitution and all other required provisions therein.

[Jacaylbaro]

Originally posted by Sophist:

Salaams,

 

Okay some clarifications are needed.

 

1. There is a DIFFERENCE between Democracy and elections.

 

Most people mistake between the two; democracy is an idea (a sort of government; or an order to organise society) whereas elections are just instruments.

 

In Greek, the word is demos-kratia, the rule by the people; this goes against the grain of Islamic spirit. In Islam, it is the Rule by Allah. As such, people execute ordained hukums rather than occupying the legislative seat if you will.

 

However, elections (as to who will execute these rules) do not contravene with Islam-- though who will participate is a debate for the Uluma.

 

That is my two cents!.

Good points indeed.

 

Ghanima, you are still differenciating between the governemt and Shariah ... once the Islamic government is there it is responsible for the religion and the implementation of the Shariah is up to the government not an institution.

 

there is where we have different views ...

[Sophist]

"There also should be in place either unicameral or bicameral house of legislature,with men who are learned in both religion and other academic field. These representatives should come by election and through a registered parties, whose mandate would be but not limited to formulation of laws and laws and all governing policies within the constitutional provisions and,in consultation with the Judiciary.The executive should consist of of a president and vice president with a high moral standards and learned in religious matters.The Executive would also be elected at intervals and should run on party tickets.The Executive role would be to consent to the bills passed by the legislature, also implement and enforce the laws and regulations with powers granted by the constitution, including the special executive powers. They are otherwise free to go by a formulated partisan process and procedures unless declared unconstitutional by the Judiciary".

 

Bro in Islam you cna not have a legislative house (meaning a institution that acts as a legislature as Allah is the ultimate legislator); whereas "democracy" it is a central pillar; that is why "Islamic democracy" is a dichotomy. What you are describing above is indeed conventional western systmen of democracy.

 

Back to the Topic; I reaffirm that the two are not compatible.

[Xargaga]

Bro in Islam you cna not have a legislative house (meaning a institution that acts as a legislature as Allah is the ultimate legislator); whereas "democracy" it is a central pillar; that is why "Islamic democracy" is a dichotomy. What you are describing above is indeed conventional western systmen of democracy.

 

Back to the Topic; I reaffirm that the two are not compatible

Bro Sophist i Agree with you that Allah is the sole legislator yet i believe there is room of interpretation for a convinient implememntation of sharia laws. This is where if you read my post well comes in the need for Learned Ulemas. Take note too that i never said Legislature would be free to formulate own laws but instead would abide by the Sharia based constitution and with the consultation of the Judiciary whom are required to be the learned Ulemas.

[Sophist]

That would be a Sharia council; or do you prefer the western term legislature?

 

My points still stand; the two are incompatible-- Islam and democracy.