(Series of Answers by the Eminent Scholar Ata Bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah, Amir of Hizb ut Tahrir, to the Questions of Visitors to His Facebook Page "Fiqhi")
Answer to a Question
To Mohammad Hadoud
Question:
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings,
How are you, our Sheikh?
I have a question regarding the Hizb's adoption (mutabannat).
Among the Hizb's adoptions is that leadership in Islam is individual; meaning that the Khalifah holds all powers in the state, essentially, the Khalifah is the state.
To clarify further: the Khalifah in the state has the right to be the ruler, the judge, and everything...
This seems to contradict what is mentioned in the book The Islamic State, where it says on page 129:
("Thus, the Messenger (saw) established the apparatus of the Islamic State himself and completed it during his life. The state had a head, and he had assistants, governors, judges, an army, department directors, and a council to refer to for consultation (shura). This apparatus, in its form and powers, is a method that must be followed, and it is generally established by mass-transmission (tawatur).")
I hope for a clarification.
May Allah reward you with goodness and grant victory through your hands.
Answer:
Peace be upon you and the mercy of Allah and His blessings,
- It seems that at the beginning of your question, you are referring to what was mentioned in the book The Islamic Personality, Volume II, in the chapter on "Al-Imarah" (Leadership), where it states the following:
"...As for this Amir, the Sharia makes it mandatory that he be one, and it is not permissible for there to be more than one. Islam does not recognize collective leadership, nor does it recognize collective presidency. Rather, leadership in Islam is purely individual; thus, the president, the Amir, or the leader must be one, and it is not permissible for there to be more than one. The evidence for this is apparent in the text of the previous Hadiths and in the action of the Messenger (saw). All the Hadiths say:
أحدهم
"one of them"
أحدكم
"one of you"
The word ahad is the word for 'one', and it indicates number—meaning one and no more. This is understood from the Mafhum al-Mukhalafah (opposite understanding). The Mafhum al-Mukhalafah regarding number, description, goal, and condition is acted upon without a specific text, and the Mafhum al-Mukhalafah is not suspended except in one case, which is if a text is reported that cancels it... Accordingly, the saying of the Messenger (saw):
فَلْيُؤَمِّرُوا أَحَدَهُمْ
"let them appoint one of them as an amir"
إِلَّا أَمَّرُوا أَحَدَهُمْ
"unless they appoint one of them as an amir"
فَأَمِّرُوا أَحَدَكُمْ
"then appoint one of you as an amir"
The Mafhum al-Mukhalafah in these Hadiths indicates that it is not permissible to appoint more than one as an Amir. Hence, leadership is for one, and it is absolutely not permissible for it to be for more than one, by the text of the Hadiths in both their literal (mantuq) and implied (mafhum) meanings. This is supported by the action of the Messenger (saw), for in all the instances where he appointed an Amir, he would appoint one and no other, and he never appointed more than one in one place at all... Accordingly, it is not permissible for one matter to have two heads, nor for one place to have two heads. Rather, the head must be one only, and it is forbidden to be more than that. **However, it should be known that presidency, leadership (Imarah), and leadership (Qiyadah) in Islam are not 'leadership' (za'amah) in the sense that za'amah requires following the leader. Rather, presidency in Islam only gives the president the right to look after the affairs and the authority (sultan) in the matter for which he was given leadership, and the execution of everything that falls under his leadership according to the powers for which he was appointed as an Amir, within the limits of what the Sharia has given him regarding the matter he was appointed head over...") End of quote from The Islamic Personality, Volume II.
- This statement that leadership and Imarah in Islam are individual does not contradict what came in the book The Islamic State where it says:
("Thus, the Messenger (saw) established the apparatus of the Islamic State himself and completed it during his life. The state had a head, and he had assistants, governors, judges, an army, department directors, and a council to refer to for consultation. This apparatus, in its form and powers, is a method that must be followed, and it is generally established by mass-transmission. The Messenger (saw) performed the actions of the head of state from the time he arrived in Medina until his death (saw). Abu Bakr and Umar were his assistants, and the Sahaba after him reached a consensus on appointing a head of state to be a Khalifah to the Messenger (saw) in the presidency of the state only, not in the Message nor in Prophethood, because it was sealed with him (saw). Thus, the Messenger (saw) established the complete state apparatus during his life and left the form of government and the state apparatus known and very clearly apparent.") End.
That is, the two texts are not contradictory; rather, they are completely harmonious. The first text in The Islamic Personality, Volume II speaks about leadership (Imarah) as it is in Islam, whether it is leadership of travel, leadership of a group, or the general leadership of the Muslims (Khilafah). Leadership in Islam is individual and not collective, meaning it is not permissible for a group to hold the authority in leadership; rather, the authority of leadership belongs only to one person who holds the final decision... This matter, while being a Shari'i rule, is also this way from a reality perspective. The reality of affairs does not function properly if the authority in leadership and ruling is collective; rather, it must be individual, meaning that the ultimate decision must rest with one... Thus, the Khilafah, which is the general leadership (the general presidency of the Muslims), is individual, meaning the one who holds the authority is the person who is given the Bay'ah (oath of allegiance) for the Khilafah. By the Bay'ah, he possesses all the powers of ruling, authority, and the adoption of laws without exception...
But giving the powers to the Khalifah does not mean at all that the Khalifah performs all the acts of ruling and authority himself. Rather, it means that the authority belongs to him, and anyone who is given authority in ruling and power only derives their authority from the Khalifah by the Khalifah delegating them in that. All the rulers in the Khilafah, such as assistants (Mu'awinoon), governors (Wulah)... etc., and all those who take charge of the judiciary, the administrative departments, the army... etc., and have powers, only have the Khalifah delegate them on his behalf in those powers. No one possesses any of those powers originally except by being a deputy for the Khalifah in some way...
So, powers are one thing, and the performance of actions is another. The Messenger (saw) possessed all the powers of ruling and authority, but he did not perform all the actions of ruling and authority himself. Rather, he used to seek the help of others, as is explained in the book The Islamic State and other books of the Hizb. The Messenger (saw) formed a complete apparatus for the state during his life, and his action (saw) indicated that this apparatus, in its form and powers, is a method that must be followed; meaning it is a Shari'i rule and not a style that changes with changing circumstances and conditions... Establishing an apparatus for the state does not contradict giving the powers to the Khalifah because the Messenger (saw), while possessing all the powers, established the state apparatus and assigned powers to it. The action of the Messenger (saw) was the greatest evidence that there is no contradiction between giving the powers to the Khalifah and establishing a state apparatus that has powers derived from the powers of the Khalifah. Those bodies assist the Khalifah in managing the affairs of the state based on the powers that the Khalifah gives to them... This is what happened during the era of the Messenger of Allah (saw). Despite the small size of the state that the Prophet (saw) established, its management required establishing an apparatus that the Prophet (saw) could use to assist him in establishing the rule and looking after the people's affairs... So how would it be if the state were vast and expansive...?!
Even though the powers belong to the Khalifah, he is restricted by the Shari'i rule. If he deviates from the Shari'i rule and thus oppresses the subjects or does not properly apply the law of Allah, then the Court of Unjust Acts (Mahkamat al-Mazhalim) looks into his matter, and it has the authority to remove him according to the rules of Sharia... It states in Article 87 of the Introduction to the Constitution derived from Shari'i evidences: ("The Judge of Unjust Acts is a judge appointed to remove every injustice committed by the State against any person living under the authority of the State, whether they are its subjects or not, and whether this injustice was committed by the Khalifah or those beneath him among the rulers and employees.") To ensure there is no fear except of Allah, the Khalifah does not have the power to dismiss the Judge of Unjust Acts while he is looking into an injustice committed by the Khalifah... It states in Article 88: ("...It is not permitted to dismiss the 'Judge of Unjust Acts' while he is looking into an injustice committed by the Khalifah...") It states in the explanation of the article: ("...This is because the power of dismissal remaining in the hands of the Khalifah in this case would affect the judge's ruling, and consequently limit the judge's ability to remove the Khalifah or his assistants, for example, and this power of dismissal would be a means to what is haram (forbidden), meaning that it remaining in the hand of the Khalifah in this case is haram.") Article 90 confirmed the authority of the Court of Unjust Acts to remove the Khalifah if he deserves it, as Article 90 states: ("The Court of Unjust Acts has the right to dismiss any ruler or employee in the state, as it has the right to dismiss the Khalifah, if the removal of the injustice requires this dismissal.") Therefore, there is no immunity for the Khalifah before the judiciary; if he errs, he is held accountable, and if he deserves dismissal, he is dismissed.
Accordingly, the Khalifah, although the powers in the state belong to him, is restricted by the Shari'i rules before the Court of Unjust Acts... and he, as we explained above, establishes the state apparatuses to assist him in the affairs of ruling and to help him in looking after the affairs according to the powers the Khalifah gives them in the work he assigns to them.
I hope that the contradiction in your mind has been removed and the harmony between the two aforementioned texts has become clear to you. Powers are one matter, and the apparatuses that help the Khalifah in managing the state's affairs and assist him in looking after the affairs of the subjects are another matter.
Your brother, Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah
14 Jumada al-Akhirah 1440 AH Corresponding to 19/02/2019 CE
Link to the answer from the Amir's (may Allah protect him) page on Facebook
Link to the answer from the Amir's (may Allah protect him) page on Google Plus