1) The concept of Islamic democracy

2) Definition of democracy

3) Definition of Islamic democracy

4) Basic tenets of Islamic democracy

5) The sovereignty of God  ii) Will of the people  iii) Welfare of the common person

6) Charter of Madina and democracy

7) Islamic caliphate and democracy

8) The difference from Western democracy

9) Modern Islamic democracies

10) Conclusion

The American Civil War war, Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as the “ government of the people, by the people and for the people” and ever since it has become the universal definition of democracy. If this is the general definition of democracy then how Islamic democracy differs from it? Islamic democracy is more or less the same with the exception that the laws devised within a democratic state must be within the ambit of Islamic teachings and the state must deliver justice to the common people by following the laws of Almighty Allah.

 

An excellent example of the practical Islamic democracy lies in the state of Madina. In the state of Madina, all the people under the leadership of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) followed a perfect model of governance in which all the subjects had the freedom of speech and freedom of religion. This tradition of true democracy was followed by the caliphs in letter and spirit. Once when a companion of the first Caliph advised him to increase his salary, he asked if the state has enough resources to give all the labourers the same kind of treatment. The companion replied in negative. The Caliph upon hearing this refused to take any extra payment from the treasury.  The same concept of true democracy was also maintained by later Caliphs (r.a). Once Umar (r.a) had to come to court for a legal hearing. Once the Judge stood up as a respect for the Caliph, he sacked the judge by saying that how can such a judge deliver justice to the poor when he doesn’t treat all the people alike. Another classical example of Islamic justice based on true democracy is the court case between Caliph Ali (r.a) and a Jew.  The Caliph lost the case on the basis that he presented his son and his servant as legal witnesses in court.  The Caliph not only respected the decision but treated the Jew with such compassion and love that he not only returned the armour of the Caliph but also embraced Islam at his hand.

 

The discussion above shows that modern Western democracy is the continuation of the same Islamic democracy that was practiced during the era of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) and his companions but there is a little difference between these systems of democracy. The difference can be described as very small but has a huge impact. The difference is on the subject that to what extent can a parliament or law-making body go in devising or amending the constitution. In Islamic democracy, the Majlis-e-Shura can form any kind of laws or can amend the constitution with the exception that the Quran has penned down some specific rules which cannot be amended. In Western democracy, the power lies with the public and has nothing to do with religion and God. The law-making body can make any kind of law in the public interest even if it collides with the law of God.

 

some people think that the modern democratic system is incompatible with Islamic law yet the beautiful blend of Islamic democracy and modern practices can be seen in many countries such as Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan. There may be many flaws in the systems of these countries and the democracy may not be delivering to the laymen but one thing is for sure and that is maturity will come only with time.