Shehu Uthman Dan Fodio, (1754-1817) is the founder of the Sokoto Sultanate[1] which was established in 1804 in West Africa. This is an extract from his book Usul al-‘Adl ‘The Foundations of Justice for Legal Guardians, Governors, Princes, Meritorious Rulers, and Kings.’
This is an excerpt from Ibn ‘Abd Rabbih’s book Al-‘Iqd al-Farid (The Unique Necklace). Ruling power is the rein of all things. It organizes rights, maintains punishments, and is the hub around which religious and secular matters turn. It is God’s protection of His country, and His shadow stretching over His servants. Through it, their wives are secure, their oppressed are given justice, their oppressors are deterred, and their frightened are safe.
The bay’a is a contract and so it’s permitted to add additional conditions to the contract, as long as these conditions do not contradict the sharia. If the khaleefah agrees to these conditions then he cannot break them without agreement from those who contracted the bay’a to him from the Ahlul hali wal-aqd (people’s electoral representatives) on behalf of the ummah. Allah (Most High) says,يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ أَوْفُوا۟ بِٱلْعُقُودِ “O you who believe, fulfil your contracts.”[1]
The term حُكْم (hukm) and its derivatives appear more than 250 times[1] in the Qur’an. Allah (Most High) says, إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يَأْمُرُكُمْ أَن تُؤَدُّوا۟ ٱلْأَمَـٰنَـٰتِ إِلَىٰٓ أَهْلِهَا وَإِذَا حَكَمْتُم بَيْنَ ٱلنَّاسِ أَن تَحْكُمُوا۟ بِٱلْعَدْلِ Allah commands you to return to their owners the things you hold on trust and, when you judge between people, to judge with justice.[2] يَـٰدَاوُۥدُ إِنَّا جَعَلْنَـٰكَ خَلِيفَةًۭ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَٱحْكُم بَيْنَ ٱلنَّاسِ بِٱلْحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعِ ٱلْهَوَىٰ فَيُضِلَّكَ عَن سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ Oh Dawud! We have made you a khaleefah on the earth, so judge between people with truth and do not follow your own desires, letting them misguide you from the Way of Allah.[3] وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ “Those who do not judge by what Allah has sent down, such people are disbelievers (kafirun).”[4] In most English translations as you can see, hukm is translated as judgement because the Arabic dictionary definition of hukm includes القَضاء (al-qadaa’) which means to issue a decree or judge. In Lisan al-Arab (1290CE): والحُكْمُ: العِلْمُ وَالْفِقْهُ وَالْقَضَاءُ بِالْعَدْلِ، وَهُوَ مَصْدَرُ …
The Khilafah (Caliphate) is an ideological Islamic State where the Islamic ‘aqeeda (belief) is the basis of the state, its institutions, systems and societal relationships. There is no separation between religion and politics in Islam as we find in the west. The Khilafah’s strength depends directly on the strength of the ideology within the state. This means those in ruling positions must be people who will work to protect, implement and propagate the deen of Islam, so the state becomes a beacon of high values, and a leading nation in the world. Only someone who believes in the ideology of the state i.e. Islam could do this, which means those in ruling positions must be Muslim. The Islamic State is no different to any ideological state within the world today. America or Western Europe for example would never accept a Muslim or Communist as President or Prime Minister. The fact that former US President Barack Obama had to repeatedly deny he is a secret Muslim is clear evidence of this. Muhammad Asad says, “One cannot …
There is consensus (ijma) among the scholars on the pillars (arkan) that someone must possess to take up the post of Khaleefah. However, there are differences of opinion (ikhtilaaf), on some of the other conditions (shuroot) such as being from Quraysh, a mujtahid (able to perform ijtihad) and brave. The contractual conditions must have a shar’a daleel (divine evidence) from the divine text (Qur’an and Sunnah). Imam Ghazali (1058-1111) says, “Conditions for the Imamate must be proved, and proof is either a text from the Trustee of the Law, or a reasoning about the benefit (maslaha) for which the Imamate is sought. The only text is that about descent from Quraysh. The other conditions are from necessity and needed for the purpose of the Imamate.”[1] Before discussing the opinions of the classical scholars concerning the contractual conditions of a Khaleefah, we need to understand the time period they lived in. Only then can we begin to appreciate why they emphasised certain conditions over others, and why they legitimised certain abnormal situations, such as the Khaleefah …
A “social contract, in political philosophy, is an actual or hypothetical compact, or agreement, between the ruled or between the ruled and their rulers, defining the rights and duties of each.”[1] While on the surface, this seems to apply to the bay’ah contract, as Ulrika Martensson has mentioned[2], the “social contract” is not in line with Islamic thought because the premise in the “social contract” is that man is sovereign (Rouseau), whereas in Islam the sharia is sovereign.[3] Shahrough Akhavi elaborates on this point: “Although social-contract theorists differ on a number of points, they concur that human beings choose to form associations to promote their interests. An important corollary is that tension exists between the individual’s inherent independence and freedom and the authority to which she or he must submit to achieve compliance with the goals of the contract. Occasionally, a theorist discusses God in the overall scheme of things, but the conception is deistic, so that the God who created the world does not intervene in its operation. For the rest, contractarian theories privilege …
The bay’ah or pledge of allegiance, is a ruling contract which governs the relationship between Muslims and the Islamic state. For those Muslims living under the authority of the state, the bay’ah is their citizenship contract with its ruler – the Khaleefah. The bay’ah is the method of appointing the Khaleefah and legitimising his rule. It must be given with the consent of the ummah, who are free to choose whomever they wish to rule them, within the boundaries of the sharia rules. If the bay’ah and its conditions are absent, then the Khaleefah has no authority to rule and will be considered a usurper. From the time of Abu Bakr to the last Khaleefah Abdul-Majed II, the bay’ah was always present and legally convened, albeit misapplied for much of Islamic history. If we look back to Islamic history, most of the major political problems and fitan (tribulations) that occurred, can be traced back in some way or the other to the misapplication of the bay’ah. It’s the misapplication of the bay’ah that distinguishes a …
Disputes broke out many times throughout the Khilafah’s 1300-year history over who should govern the state. One thing remained constant however and that was the bay’a. No Khaleefah ever came to power without the bay’a, and this method of appointing the ruler continued until 1924. 1. Mu’awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan (41H/661CE – 60H/680CE) The Civil War between Mu’awiyah and Ali During the civil war between Mu’awiya and Ali, Mu’awiya never claimed the Khilafah for himself or took the bay’a for himself. Rather he made his bay’a conditional on Ali handing over Uthman’s assassins which Ali was unable to fulfil at that time. Abu Muslim Al-Khawlani and a group of people said to Mu’awiyah: “Do you disagree with Ali or are you like him?” So Mu’awiyah said: “No, By Allah! I know that Ali is better than me, and he has more right to the leadership than me. However, do you not know that Uthman was killed wrongfully!? I am his cousin (‘Uthman’s cousin), and I am asking for his blood, so go to Ali and …
The 9th year of the Hijrah is known as the ‘Year of the Delegations’ (سنة الوفود), in which each Arab tribe sent a group of representatives to meet with the Prophet ﷺ in Madinah. Apart from the Christians of Najran who chose to remain on their religion and pay the jizya, the rest of the Arab tribes accepted Islam and gave their bay’ah to the Prophet ﷺ. Since the bay’ah for many of these tribes and individuals was given at the same time as accepting Islam, this may lead someone to the conclusion that the bay’ah is related to belief, and withdrawing bay’ah is apostasy. In response to this, bay’ah is related to ruling which is an action, and those who give bay’ah are already Muslim. The evidences for this are as follows. 1- Bay’ah is always taken from a believer Allah (Most High) says: يا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِذا جاءَكَ المُؤمِناتُ يُبايِعنَكَ “O Prophet! When women who have iman come to you pledging allegiance to you…”[1] لقد رضي الله عن المؤمنين إذ يبايعونك تحت الشجرة …
Islamic Civilization 