All About Voting

[Rahima]

All About Voting

Haytham bin Jawwad al-Haddad

Article ID: 1225 | 547 Reads

 

 

 

In the name of Allâh, and in Him we seek assistance, and all praise is due to Allâh, Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship besides Allâh alone, without any associate, and there is nothing comparable to Him. And I testify that Muhammad is His servant and final Messenger.

 

 

Introduction:

 

When we discuss the issue of voting or any other similar contemporary issue we should try to understand its reality before coming up with a conclusion about its ruling, this is what is termed as fiqh al waqi’(being aware and understanding the environment and factors surrounding the topic of concern) which is mentioned by the scholars. Ibn al-Qayyim considered understanding fiqh al waqi’ as one of the prerequisites of the mufti alongside fiqh al mas’alah (possessing proper perception of the issue at hand and its related rulings) that were necessary in order to arrive at a legal opinion about a certain issue of concern.

 

Let us commence by considering the following scenario: we have a ruler and his subjects and the ruler leaves it to the people to decide, giving them two choices, either the law of Allah or man-made law. In this situation there are three parties involved:

 

 

1- The ruler himself who puts the law of the Creator (Shari’ah) in question or debate between people; there is no doubt that this ruler committed an act of kufr for he is obliged to rule by the law of the Creator . Allah says, “Legislation is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him.†[Qur’an, 12:41]. To him this ayah is addressed, “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (disbelievers).†[Qur’an, 5:44].

 

2- The subjects who were asked to select between the Shari’a and man-made law; they have to choose the Shari’a. The mechanism of choosing the Shari’a may take various forms; voting is one form, demonstrations are another form, and sending letters is a third form. People must do their best in order to choose Shari’a and make it dominant. Can any one say, here, that it is impermissible for people to vote to choose the Shari’a since voting is part and parcel of democracy which in turn is kufr? If we say that then we do not correctly conceptualised the issue at hand. Saying that such voting is an act of kufr is total nonsense. Imagine the case when a person is consulted, as happens in some countries, whether he wants to take his case to the Shari’a court or a court that will rule on the basis of man-made law. Should this person say I do not want to choose since choosing is voting and voting is part of democracy which is Kufr!? What shall he do? Shall he abstain from doing anything? What if the constitution states that the judicial system is man-made law unless the person opts for the Shari’a court in which case he is allowed to do so. Can we say in this case that this person is obliged to vote or choose the Shari’a court? Can we also say that abstention from voting means that the person implicitly accepted the man-made law as the judicial system and this is an act of kufr? From this discussion we can conclude three important points:

 

a. Voting means, in many cases, choosing or selecting.

 

b. Participation in a kufr system does not necessarily mean participation in kufr. It depends on the nature of this participation.

 

c. Abstention from voting some times causes more damage or harm than voting itself.

 

3- The people who want to be part of the legislative executive like those who want to be members of parliament. This issue requires a separate detailed study and is beyond the scope of discussion here

 

 

Let us also take another important scenario. It is when the inhabitants of a country, who have the Shari’a as the dominant system, want to choose a leader for their country; say they have four candidates to choose from. They employ elections as a mechanism to select the leader, can we say this is democracy and it is an act of kufr?

 

 

Brothers and sisters, from the above discussion we conclude that it is absolutely wrong to generalise the ruling by saying that democracy is an act of kufr. We should instead say something that makes sense to people which reflects that we understand what we are talking about. Leave alone the issue of accusing some one of kufr being a major sin and that is why we should be extremely careful before doing such. The prophet e says “The one who accuses his brother of kufr then surely one of them is suchâ€.

 

 

Democracy originally meant people’s ruling. However these days it has various ways of implementations. It is used as a selection mechanism. That is why we see another term is being introduced now which is liberal democracy. Some observers believe that it was introduced to emphasise that Muslim countries should not only use this mechanism to select the rulers while the constitution remains Islam rather they should vote for the constitution which in their case is Islam itself. So democracy from this perspective means the constitution itself has to be subject to selection through a democratic mechanism.

 

 

Muslims living under Kufr system:

 

Muslims living under a dominant democratic system which they can not change in the near future should understand their situation in all its various facets. Muslims believe that ultimate justice, peace and coherence can not be achieved unless the divine system is dominant. In many cases they are unable to achieve this in the foreseeable future. So what shall they do until they reach this stage?

 

They are living under a kufr system where either party A, B or C will be in power. People have the privilege to choose among these parties. If you do not choose any of them you are not going to change the system since one of them will still be in power. You might say that if all people were not to choose any of them then the system will change. This might be true; however it is almost impossible for this to take place in the foreseeable future in all so called democratic non-Muslims countries. So the question arises that until the system changes, what shall we, the Muslims do?

 

Any sane person would say that abstaining from selecting the least evil option would only leave room for the more evil option to win. It is a very simple and straight forward equation.

 

Here let us answer various queries forwarded by those brothers who are against selection through voting. However, before doing so, in our discussions we should identify why we are against voting, is it because it is an act of kufr i.e. the ruling of voting from the Shari’a point of view or because it is harmful and damaging for Muslims? Such a distinction is crucial to have a fruitful academic debate. If the reason is the first, then we should refer to the first part of this article. If the reason is the second then let us examine the possible arguments and respond to them:

 

1. Doesn’t selecting one of these parties ultimately endorse their policies that are based on man made laws (kufr law).

 

 

The answer is No, this is not necessarily the case for the following reason:

 

Choosing an option means that you endorse it only if there are better options offered. But if the other choice is worse, then actually you are endorsing the difference between this and the less harmful option. Take for example eating unslaughtered meat for a starving person. He is allowed or even obliged to do so, yet does it mean that he is endorsing eating unslaughtered meat? Rather, he is endorsing the difference between these options which in this case is saving his life. Saving his life by eating unslaughtered meat is good compared to starving to death. That is why this is an agreed upon principle. So quoting each party’s statements that they are going to do so and so if they win separately and without comparing this with what other parties say is not a very honest approach since it does not give the audience the full picture. This becomes worst when the alternative presented is just a hypothetical solution.

 

So I urge the brothers and sisters not to accuse any body of kufr or sins just because they vote for one of these parties in such a situation. Such accusations reflect ignorance as well as naivety in comprehension.

 

 

1- By voting you are involved in the political system which is a step towards integration which ultimately means loosing the identity of Muslims living under western countries.

 

I agree that integration in its wider meaning leads to the loss of identity and it is a hidden agenda by the enemies of Islam to deceive Muslims so they loose their identity. However, this is not necessarily an implication of voting. I agree that full political participations might lead to major problems for Muslims and we have to be very careful when stepping into this arena. However, ticking the box for one of the candidates does not mean full political participation.

 

I would like to mention here that I also advise our brothers who are involved in leading Muslims in terms of politics to be aware that some Muslims might understand that voting means full involvement in the game of politics which is full of lying and tricks as has been realised by many non-Muslims themselves. So they should use careful language and words when encouraging Muslims to vote. Statements such as: voting is the only way for Muslims in this country, voting is the lifeboat, voting is part of our belief, voting means citizenship, and so on should be avoided. Such emotional and extreme statements lead to converse statements and reactions that are equally emotional and extreme.

 

 

2- It is not true that we do not have another option. We have to strengthen our Muslim community and work hard for our independence.

 

I think no one disagrees that the Muslim community needs to strengthen themselves and build their own organizations and schools etc. However, this is not an option that is incompatible with having party A,B or C in power. This is one matter and that is another, there is no contradiction between the two options. We can vote to select the best option while we are working for our community and our future.

 

3- We are not going to get anything by voting while it might be impermissible so it is better to abstain from it.

 

 

It is not easy to come up with such a conclusion. We need a deep thorough study and analysis to confirm that all parties are nothing but different faces of one coin. I also agree that voting is not the lifeline for Muslims in this country as represented by some Muslims. I have asked parties on both sides of the voting argument to come up with an academic study to prove their points. However, it is difficult to say that all parties are exactly the same in internal and external policy. Logically, not all non-Muslims are the same, even the kuffar of Makkah were different. Abu Talib, the uncle of the Prophet is totally different from Abu Jahl. Abu Talib helped the Prophet e and sheltered him while the other one used to torture the Prophet and the companions. Should we not do our best to choose the one that is less evil and better for humanity?

 

Also, I would like to clarify here that abstention from voting is actually indirect voting. Let me explain this by the following example. Imagine that 6 people were to vote for two parties named A and B. A says in his manifesto that he will legalise pornography, ban faith schools, kill 1000 Muslims, prevent Muslims from Hijab and other rights. While B said that he will legalise pornography but allow faith schools and kill 500 Muslims. 3 of us vote for A and 2 vote for B and Me as a Muslim believing that voting is kufr abstained from doing so. Then what will happen? A will win, however if I vote for B, then no one will win. So I participated in lessening the evil. Let us now say that we have 2 more people, either they vote for B or abstain. Abstention will not change the situation while encouraging them to vote for B, who will do all these filthy things, will mean that A will loose which means that we saved the life of 500 Muslims and had a chance to have faith schools and practice hijab! So whether we vote or note, we actually vote since we are part of the population. This is how the system works, at least in Britain. If someone disagrees with this then he should prove this to us and bear in mind that he should be systematic in his approach and clear in presenting his case. In his abstaining to vote he has implicitly accepted the principle of voting when it is proved that abstention from voting is indirect voting.

 

 

4- If we vote we will not bring any Muslim to power?

 

It is true, but who said that our aim in the near future is to bring a Muslim into power. Our realistic aim in the near future is to have a better person with a better system in power. It is impossible and impractical to think of having a true Muslim leader in the near future in most or even all the non-Muslim countries. Our ultimate aim is to help those who are better than their co-politicians into power.

 

 

5- Boycotting elections is better for Muslims since it sends a strong message to the politician that we are not happy with them and their system. Moreover it will show the ineligibility of this round of elections.

 

 

This might be true but as I said earlier we need a deep study and understanding of the complicated political international situation to confirm such conclusions. I urge those brothers who believe in this to produce a provisional work proving this point. In the mean time we should know that such boycotting will not be effective unless all Muslims do so. That is why, before we arrive at such conclusions a deep discussion with all Muslims involved in politics and other related fields should take place. It should not be an individual opinion of a single party or so. However, we should bear in mind that if a decision were taken to boycott elections, then we should be clear why we do so. Is it because of the original ruling of voting and elections or because of the impracticality of it?

 

 

Conclusion:

 

I would like to conclude here by urging the brothers and sisters to be united in their decision. Such unity is the only way for their voice to be effective. Unity here means following one strategy whether we decided to vote or to boycott elections. Once we decide to vote, which is the decision now at least in the UK, then we should appoint one main body to lead us in this decision. I believe that we, Muslims in UK, should follow the opinion of the Muslims Association of Britain. They have prepared a good strategy for Muslims to use. You may find it on their website www.mabonline.net

 

 

Haitham Al-Haddad

 

Haitham01234@yahoo.co.uk

 

25th Rabiee al Awwal 1426

 

4th May 2005.

[Johnny B]

A very in-depth light shed on an important contemporary subject , a well worded peice of theological penetration to the subject of VOTING.

 

but sister Rahima ...

In contrast to the subject , the ONLY two countries on earth that applied SHARIA ( that i know of) are(were) Afghanistan( under Taliban) and Iran.

 

From the individual´s point of view , it ain´t more than RIGHT to have a SAY in a process that effects your life in a way or another.

 

As Indivituals make societies , The role of the tiny Ant in the colony is STILL a vital role.