Huzoor: Islam does not describe any political system valid as such as against others, nor could Islam do that and still retain its claim to be a true world religion because no one political system is suitable or can ever be conceived to be suitable for all the people of the globe at one single moment in history or in future because although we are living apparently in one time in one age, but we are not living the same age, we are living different ages in different countries. Pygmies in Congo are living a different age altogether from people living in Europe, and people living in Europe are living a different age from the people living in America and within the countries also there are regional differences, attitudes of the people, their educational standards, their national traditions, their outlooks on life, their social systems and so many things get involved to create a political system, and that system would be differently chosen if given volition by different people at different times.
Some countries are traveling towards democracy and some are traveling away from democracy having got the democracy to begin with. So how could Islam be a true universal religion disregarding all these factors at variance with each other, and claim that this is the political system which is good for mankind? There is no one single system which is good for mankind. So Islam totally ignores any mention to a system but what is most important for mankind in politics that is mentioned by Islam.
However, a government comes into creation. Whatever system a people adopt, the way of dispensation of justice and the responsibilities they hold towards the people, they have been made manifestly clear in the Holy Quran. So and there the hands of men are so tightly bound that even if a fascist regime begins to act according to the teachings of the Holy Qur’an, as far as their responsibilities to their own people are concerned, they would be behaving exactly in the way of an ideal democracy.
So the difference between the nomenclature would be left just nominal and superficial. What is required, what is the most essential part of democracy, is for the people. The government of the people, by the people, for the people, this is the popular definition of democracy but it so often happens that the government of the people is only in name. Most of the people who are represented are only represented in name just once for a while people go to them and they don’t know who they’re choosing in fact. Their large constituencies, it’s impossible for anyone to go and choose so now, instead of personal introductions, the introductions of parties have replaced the older system but even that is vague.
The parties go, not for what is good for the people, they go for the power and most often and for popular sloganism. So this is most unreliable system to call a democracy truly of the people is a very debatable word to say the least, and by the people in what respect. You choose somebody once, and once he goes to power, he dictates his own terms to you, the government does, and the majority of people cannot be represented in fact truly by some people representing them. So the same democracy is used for the most grim dictatorships of the modern ages because this democracy of the people, and by the people, is in evidence in Russia, in China, in so many other countries where Politburo members and other representatives of the state are chosen by the people.
So what is left for democracy then? Democracy in Pakistan would mean a different thing, democracy in Africa would mean a different thing, while the first two principles are the same. The result is that there will be very few democracies who reach the final point of for the people. Most often, they’re not there for the people who are chosen not for the people who had chosen them. So Islam leaves aside the first two elements and lays stresses, and makes it very clear what a government, if it is to be called an Islamic government according to the teachings of the Qur’an, must do. And the standards are so high and absolute that they have no relativity in them.
For instance justice, all the standards of justice as applied today by the modern democracies have a relative meaning. If something is good for a people, their representatives must do that even if that is cruel to some other people. Even if at the cost of the justice to other people you have to do justice, sort of justice to your own people, this is permissible. In fact this is the principle applied today. But the Holy Qur’an says wa laa yajrim annakum shanaanu qawmin alaa allaa taadilu aydilu huwaa qrabul taqwa, that, oh you believe, oh those who believe let not even the grave enmity of a people compel you to part from ways of justice. Dispense justice even if you have to do it in favor of your bitter enemies. Now is this what is practiced nowadays by the people of today? Look at the United Nations decisions, look at the Security Council decisions, and the votes and the abstentions and the critical methods and diplomatic methods of avoiding some embarrassments if friends are involved and then the vetoes, I mean they are the cream of the modern society.
People look up at United Nations organizations and Security Council with hopes for dispensation of this justice and everything is found there except justice. It is the case, there is like to a joke told in some countries that some, one head of the state visited another country, perhaps in the Gulf, where there was no railways. No railway track was ever laid down there, yet they had a minister of railways. So this dignitary visiting from another country, I shouldn’t name it, he was surprised he said look here what this nonsense, what’s this nonsense? You have no railways and a minister for railways? He said you should understand it better, you have no justice and still you have a minister of justice in your country. That’s exactly what the Security Council is doing nowadays. They’re dispensing what they do not have, unfortunately. This is why I said immorality is the root of every cause of disturbance. So Islam, this is Islamic teachings, no government however elected or however ever brought to be imposed upon people can be called according to the concept of government of the Holy Qur’an if it does not know the ABC of how the government should be run, that is dispensation of justice.
And then it goes on, there’s so many in, so many places the concept of Islamic government is explained without reference to the mode how the governments are brought into power.
