Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Session 7: Democracy and its roots

Athens which is considered cradle of democracy had a classical form of it.It projected the very image of assembly (national or provincial) that we have today in modern world.Athens served as a model of democracy.It had a mass meeting of its citizens and national issues were raised,discussed and sorted out.Citizens were well aware of the happenings of the state.They had a say in the affairs that were related and affected them.This way the two of the cherished rights of democracy i.e. right to vote and right to know(have information) were available to the citizens of the Athens. Although.Although one can say was it a referendum or voting power but either way the common people had active participation in the process.Athens nonetheless served as a model for democracy.

Now if we look at examples from Islamic history. We do find the similar pattern of electing rulers by the public vote .The concept of 'Majilis ash Shura" does substitute for parliament.It was a form of representative democracy because it did establish a relation between government and governed.While electing caliph there would be a gathering of masses and everybody would be asked about their opinion of the person nominated as a caliph. The objections of the people were being taken into the account. If the allegations held its ground after the due process the caliph would have been disqualified.The standard of assessment for leader was derived from the morals and principles given by Quran and Sunnah. Also another one of the celebrated gifts of democracy is the freedom of speech and the right to know. This was very much practicable in first four caliphs time of rule.The caliph would deliver a sermon on Friday prayers. Any citizen of the state could openly criticize any policy,action or decision of head of the state. The leader was supposed to provide a clarification of his acts.So he was accountable to the public that elected him for the job.

All matters of the state i.e its security, budget and its spending were discussed in "Majilis- ash -Shura". In Al-nour Sura last three verses talks about democracy meetings The other members of Majilis ash Shura were the well educated(aware) and experienced ones whom enjoyed the trust of community. This Shura mechanism was ordered in Quran and its member were recognized in it as "people of experience" (Al-Nesaa 59-83).

So Muslims do have some golden history for cherishing and celebrating in which the democratic principles were introduced and practiced and respected.

4 comments:

Unknown said...

Excellent work boy!

Arsalaan Allawala said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Arsalaan Allawala said...

In that decisions were taken through the process of consultation and that it was meant to be a system devoid of kingship inheritance in a manner that the leader was a servant leader of the people instead of an absolute king and was thereby accountable and questionable if found lagging in his understanding of a certain issue, it can be termed a close-to-democratic governance style.

However, after due consultation, the leader did hold the authority to over rule his consultation body and make the decision he felt was best, even if that was a lone voice. Also, the election process was not a representation of what we now call a 'democratic exercise.' All citizens of the state were not involved in the consultation process, rather a select group of competent individuals conducted the exercise of deliberating upon who held the right to be the leader of the state. 'One Person, One Vote' was not a recognized principle.

I wonder what implications this analysis has for our process of classifying the early succession of Islamic leadership as democratic in the sense that we use the word today.

Unknown said...

The question here lies why is a system similar to majlis e shura not implemented now? Why is Islam not studied and acted upon? Why have these other legal forums been preferred? Saleh! My unanswered questions illustrate a fact that democracy and its laws are a mere manipulation of rights as the ruling party is not made accountable in it.