Islamic democracy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are two main types that people may term Islamic democracy:
- A democratic state where the majority of the population are Muslim, or which attempts to reconcile Islam with a secular, democratic state.
- A democratic state which endeavours to institute Sharia (traditional Islamic law).
For example, Turkey falls into the first category, being mainly Muslim, but with a separation of religion and state as instituted in the formation of the Republic. A list of other such democracies is given below. Pakistan started off as the first category but has moved increasingly with the 1973 constitution to the second category, though frequent military coups have halted its democratic evolution. Democracy with religious law is viewed by some as being an oxymoron.
Contents |
[edit] The compatibility of Islam and democracy
Most Islamic democracies fall under the first definition, leading many analysts to dismiss the compatibility of Islam with democracy. The arguments for this position include: Islam and secularism are opposite forces; theocracy is incompatible with democracy; and Muslim culture lacks the liberal social attitudes of democratic societies. For example, Ausuf Ali, a former professor of business at the University of Karachi writing on Beliefnet, argues that in the case of Pakistan (where democratically elected governments have been regularly overthrown by the military) shows that: "Islam and the Sharia, or Islamic law, simply do not have the conceptual resources, flexibility, and dynamism to suffice for the governance of a modern state and operation of a rational economy and an expanding civil society." In that case Ali is was arguing that "Pakistani styled extremist Islam and democracy are not compatible".
Legal scholar L. Ali Khan, however, argues that Islam is fully compatible with democracy. In his book, A Theory of Universal Democracy, Khan provides a critique of liberal democracy and secularism. He presents the concept of "fusion state" in which religion and state are fused. There are no contradictions in God's Universe, says Khan. Contradictions represent the limited knowledge that human beings have. According to the Quran and the Suuna, Muslims are fully capable of preserving spirituality and self-rule. See abstract
Furthermore, counter arguments to these points assert that this attitude presuppose democracy as a static system which only embraces a particular type of social and cultural system, namely that of the post-Christian West. See: constitutional theocracy.
Muslim democrats, including Ahmad Moussalli (professor of Political science at the American University of Beirut), argue that concepts in the Qur'an point towards some form of democracy, or at least away from despotism. These concepts include shura (consultation), ijma' (consensus), al-hurriyya (freedom), al-huqquq al-shar'iyya (legitimate rights). For example shura (Aal `Imran 3:159, Ash-Shura 42:38) may include electing leaders to represent and govern on the community’s behalf. Government by the people is not therefore necessarily incompatible with the rule of Islam, whilst it has also been argued that rule by a religious authority is not the same as rule by a representative of Allah. This viewpoint, however, is disputed by more traditional Muslims.
Prof Moussalli argues that despotic Islamic governments have abused the Qur'anic concepts for their own ends: "For instance, shura, a doctrine that demands the participation of society in running the affairs of its government, became in reality a doctrine that was manipulated by political and religious elites to secure their economic, social and political interests at the expense of other segments of society," (In Progressive Muslims 2003).
A further argument against Islamic democracy in practice, is that some democratic governments in Islamic states are not homegrown, but imposed by the West, such as the one in Afghanistan and the nascent post-Baathist regime in Iraq [1].
[edit] Other issues
Islamic democratic systems have the same human rights issues as other democracies, but some matters which may cause friction include appeasing anti-democratic Islamists, non-Muslim religious minorities, the role of Islam in state education (especially with regard to Sunni and Shia traditions), women's rights (See: Islamic feminist movement). This is further complicated by the deriving of punishments from Fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence, where, as in other legal systems, precedent assists the judiciary to come to a decision. Since the judiciary is not independent of a system of religious codes that are essentially the collective reasoning of often highly conservative scholars, the system is inherently conservative, and thus is less flexible and able to adapt to developing views of the subjects listed above.
In addition, while some Islamic democracies ban alcohol outright, as it is against the religion, other governments allow the individual to choose whether to transgress Islam themselves. In these instances, while the act will be considered wrong by strict Muslims, the penalty is seen to be a spiritual not a worldly one.
[edit] Islamic democracy in Turkey
Turkey is a democratic state with a majority Muslim population, which was founded by Ataturk on the basis of the separation of Islam and that state. Recently, the ruling Turkish Justice and Development Party has stated that it sees the Christian Democratic parties of Europe as a model, and seeks to reconcile the tenets of Islam within this separation. However, its opponents see it as a front for Islamists, seeking to undermine this separation.
[edit] Islamic democracy in the Middle East
See also: Democracy in the Middle East
Writing on The Guardian website [2], Brian Whitaker, the paper's Middle East editor, argued that there were four major obstacles to democracy in the region: the Imperial legacy, oil wealth, the Arab-Israeli conflict and militant or "backward-looking" Islam.
The imperial legacy includes the borders of the modern states themselves and the existence of significant minorities within the states. Acknowledgement of these differences are frequently suppressed usually in the cause of "national unity" and sometimes to obscure the fact that a minority elite is controlling the country. Brian Whitaker argues that this leads to the formation of policitical parties on ethnic, religious or regional divisions, rather than over policy differences. Voting therefore becomes an assertion of one's identity rather than a real choice.
The problem with oil and the wealth it generates is that the states' rulers have the wealth to remain in power, as they can pay off or repress most potential opponents. Brian Whitaker argues that as there is no need for taxation there is less pressure for representation. Furthermore, Western governments require a stable source of oil and are therefore more prone to maintain the status quo, rather than push for reforms which may lead to periods of instability (Also see: Saudi America on Khilafah.com).
The Arab-Israeli conflict serves as a unifying factor for the countries of the Arab League, and also serves as an excuse for repression by Middle Eastern governments. For example, in March 2004 Sheikh Mohammed Fadlallah, Lebanon's leading Shia cleric, is reported as saying "We have emergency laws, we have control by the security agencies, we have stagnation of opposition parties, we have the appropriation of political rights - all this in the name of the Arab-Israeli conflict". The West, especially the USA, is also seen as a supporter of Israel, and so it and its institutions, including democracy, are seen by many Muslims as suspect. Khaled abu el-Fadl, a lecturer in Islamic law at the University of California comments "modernity, despite its many scientific advancements, reached Muslims packaged in the ugliness of disempowerment and alienation."
This repression by Arab rulers has led to the growth of radical Islamic movements, as they believe that the institution of an Islamic theocracy will lead to a more just society. However, these groups tend to be very intolerant of alternative views, including the ideas of democracy. Many Muslims who argue that Islam and democracy are compatible live in the West, and are therefore seen as "contaminated" by non-Islamic ideas. [3]
[edit] Islamic democracy in the former Soviet Union
Many of the states of the former Soviet Union, including Russia have significant Muslim populations. They are mainly concentrated in the south of the region, to the east of the Black Sea. The democratic status of many of these states, such as Ukraine and those in Central Asia, is very controversial, and the Soviet Union itself was also officially an atheist state (although it made some concessions in Central Asia after the Basmachi rebellion). The resurgence of Islam, the break up of the Soviet Union and the attempts to introduce democracy all occurred within the same few years, and represented a huge, and not always peaceful, upheaval.
Russia's wars in majority Muslim Chechnya and Afghanistan have also strained relations in both Russia, and the other former Soviet states where there are significant Russian minorities. In some of the states, democracy has been seen as a western import, and has fallen to the same post-Soviet backlash as Communism has.
[edit] Examples of Muslim democracies
The following list indicates those countries which are members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference and are either generally considered to be democratic or have substantial democratic elements in their system of government. For example, Iran has popular elections, but the candidates are selected by the Council of Guardians and the Assembly of Experts. Furthermore, the political climate in some of these countries has varied greatly in recent years, while in some of the countries there have been accusations of vote-rigging.
The percentage of Muslims in each country is sourced from CIA FactBook
- Albania (Europe) (70% Muslim)
- Algeria (North Africa) (99%)
- Bangladesh (South Asia) (83%)
- Comoros (South eastern Africa) (98%)
- Indonesia (South-East Asia) (88%)
- Kyrgyzstan (Central Asia) (75%)
- Lebanon (Middle-East) (59.7%)
- Malaysia (South-East Asia)
- Mali (West Africa) (90%)
- Morocco (North Africa) (98.7%)
- Niger (West Africa) (80%)
- Senegal (West Africa) (94%)
- Sierra Leone (West Africa) (60%)
- Turkey (Europe / Asia) (99.8%)
- Yemen (Arabian peninsula - Asia) (+90%)
Until the recent coups d'état, Pakistan and The Gambia were also considered democracies.
[edit] Bibliography
- Mahmoud Sadri and Ahmad Sadri (eds.) 2002 Reason, Freedom, and Democracy in Islam: Essential Writings of Abdolkarim Soroush, Oxford University Press
- Omid Safi (ed.) 2003 Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender and Pluralism, Oneworld
- Azzam S. Tamimi 2001 Rachid Ghannouchi: A Democrat within Islamism, Oxford University Press
- Khan L. Ali 2003 A Theory of Universal Democracy, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers
[edit] External links
- Islam and Democracy: Perceptions and Misperceptions by Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq
- Democracy and the Muslim World ( series of articles on Islam and Democracy from Islamica Magazine)
- Islamic Democracies (article)
- Preview of the Seoul Conference on The Community of Democracies: Challenges and Threats to Democracy
- Marina Ottoway, et al., "Democratic Mirage in the Middle East," Carnegie Endowment for Ethics and International Peace, Policy Brief 20, (October 20, 2002). Internet, available online at: http://www.ceip.org/files/publications/HTMLBriefs-WP/20_October_2002_Policy_Brief/20009536v01.html
- Marina Ottoway and Thomas Carothers, "Think Again: Middle East Democracy,"Foreign Policy (Nov./Dec. 2004). Internet, available online at: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2705&print=1
- Chris Zambelis, "The Strategic Implications of Political Liberalization and Democratization in the Middle East," Parameters, (Autumn 2005). Internet, available online at: http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/05autumn/zambelis.htm
- The Muslim's world future is freedom Book review, with some controversial content.
- National Union for Democracy in Iran
- Democracy in the Middle East A series of articles in the Guardian on the problems of democracy in the region by Brian Whitaker.