Foundations of Partisanship in Islamic Political Thought (book)
 | |
| Book Information | |
|---|---|
| Author | Sayyid Abd al-Qayyum Sajjadi |
| Style | Argumentative |
| Language | Persian |
| Volumes | 1 |
| Pages | 252 |
| Publication Information | |
| Publisher | Bustan-e Ketab |
| English Translation | |
| Translator | Abdullah Shahin |
- Abstract
Foundations of Partisanship in Islamic Political Thought, written by Sayyid Abd al-Qayyum Sajjadi, is a book in the field of Political Fiqh. The book has also been translated into Arabic under the title *Usus al-Tahazzub fi al-Fikr al-Siyasi al-Islami*. In three main sections, the author analyzes the foundations of pluralism, political participation, and the role of parties in a system of guardianship (*wilayah*). Critiquing the "obstructionist" view, he argues that Islam is not incompatible with democracy and partisanship, and that concepts such as consultation (*shura*), allegiance (*bay'ah*), enjoining good and forbidding evil, and freedom of criticism provide the necessary theoretical grounds for the activities of political parties.
Sajjadi, accepting pluralism in the domain of secondary matters and customary issues, explains the jurisprudential foundations of political participation through consultation, allegiance, advising the leaders of the Muslims (*nasihat al-a'immat al-muslimin*), and freedom of criticism. He believes that, given the correlation between reason and religious law, the existence of political parties for the oversight of power is a rational matter and does not require scriptural evidence for its proof. At the end of the book, he analyzes the impact of different theories on the legitimacy of the Guardianship of the Jurist (*Wilayat al-Faqih*)—appointed, elected, and combined—on the environment for party activity and the extent of people's political participation. In his belief, in the discourse of Imam Khomeini, the theory of the Guardianship of the Jurist has the capacity to adapt to the needs of the time, and this capacity provides a suitable ground for political parties.
Brief Introduction
- Foundations of Partisanship in Islamic Political Thought* is a book in the field of Political Fiqh authored by Dr. Sayyid Abd al-Qayyum Sajjadi. Sajjadi, a graduate of the Seminary of Qom, teaches political science at Khatam al-Nabiyyin University in Kabul, Afghanistan. *Diplomacy and Political Conduct in Islam* is another of his works in the field of contemporary fiqh.
The second edition of *Foundations of Partisanship in Islamic Political Thought* was published in 1387 SH by Bustan-e Ketab Publications in Qom in 252 pages. The book has also been translated into Arabic by Abdullah Shahin under the title *Usus al-Tahazzub fi al-Fikr al-Siyasi al-Islami* and published by Muhibbin Publications in 1400 SH.
Structure of the Book
The book begins with a table of contents and the author's preface and concludes with a summary and a bibliography. The main discussions of the book are organized into three sections. In the first section, the author addresses generalities and the theoretical framework. In the second section, he examines the jurisprudential foundations of political pluralism, political participation, political competition, and elections and the right to vote. The third section is dedicated to the role of the party in the guardianship system and the political legitimacy of the guardianship system and political parties.
Compatibility of Islam with Democracy and Partisanship
After defining "party" and explaining its components, theoretical grounds, functions, and disadvantages, the author explains the jurisprudential foundations of parties (pp. 23-48). The first foundation is the view of the proponents of obstructionism, who consider parties a new phenomenon and a requisite of the modern era. Due to the absence of the concept of democracy in religion, they consider the discussion of partisanship to be meaningless (pp. 49-50). Sajjadi criticizes this view, believing that Islam is not at odds with democracy; rather, the indicators of democracy can be traced in some religious concepts such as consultation (*shura*), allegiance (*bay'ah*), and oversight of those in power (pp. 53-54).
In contrast to the obstructionist view, there is a positive approach to parties. While emphasizing the novelty of the concept of a party, it avoids literalism and examines the indicators and theoretical grounds of parties from a religious perspective (pp. 50-51). The author considers the main claim of this theory to be correct but warns that in formulating a jurisprudential basis, one should not be content with a functionalist approach to parties (p. 56).
Negation of Pluralism in Principles and Its Acceptance in Branches
According to the author, partisanship and pluralism in the political sphere, which pertains to accepting the diversity of political opinions and the distribution of power among social forces, is one of the important theoretical prerequisites for parties. The author, who sees a connection between political pluralism and religious and cultural pluralism, examines the issue of religious and political pluralism from an Islamic perspective (pp. 61-65).
Sajjadi describes his own view on religious pluralism as a middle path, which, while accepting the postulates and general principles of religion, accepts a diversity of views in the domain of secondary matters (*furu'*) and customary issues (p. 67). Also, in his belief, Islamic political thought, while accepting the principle of fallibility in *ijtihad*, rejects any form of absolutism in the political management of society and respects diverse and different views in the Islamic community (p. 70). He then introduces the principle of fallibility in *ijtihad* as one of the fundamental principles of Shi'ism and explains the effects and results of this view (pp. 73-75).
Reasons for the Validity of Political Competition from an Islamic Perspective
According to the author's report, from an Islamic perspective, power has no intrinsic value, and its desirability depends on the value of its goals (p. 78), but there are two opposing views regarding political competition (p. 79). According to opponents, Islamic commands in various fields are based on solid foundations, and the Islamic ruler, possessing knowledge and without personal whims, applies them. Therefore, there is no room for political competition, which arises from the lack of a reliable theory. Furthermore, political competition harms people's beliefs and weakens their trust in the ruler (p. 80). However, proponents of accepting political competition within religious thought, while rejecting the opponents' arguments, have argued for their own view based on the following reasons (p. 83):
Consultation (*Shura*)
The author considers consultation (*shura*) an example of political competition in which, through the clash of opinions, a more correct opinion is reached. In his belief, *shura* provides a platform similar to a parliament for this competition, which is manifested in the competition of parties and the formulation of political strategy and executive and legislative programs. Commentators, by asking "Why did the infallible Prophet need to consult?", see the philosophy of *shura* in distributing responsibility, attracting community participation, and valuing different opinions. Therefore, *shura*—whether binding or recommended—is a prominent example of the legitimacy of participation and political competition in decision-making (pp. 84-86). He then presents the views of some Shia thinkers on the necessary and undeniable principle of *shura* (pp. 86-92).
Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil
Sajjadi introduces enjoining good and forbidding evil as a universal mission and a real method for social change and reform and for dealing with deviations in the religious community and the Islamic state, which provides the grounds for the political participation and competition of individuals (p. 93). In his opinion, enjoining and forbidding in political management and the administration of society is one of the domains of this religious duty. The author considers this jurisprudential perspective to include oversight of political power and sees it as a cause for social reform as well as political participation and competition (pp. 94-96). He then explains the relationship between enjoining good and forbidding evil and the discussion of political competition in two axes: the collective dimension of enjoining good and forbidding evil and the methods of its implementation (pp. 97-101).
Freedom
According to the author, political competition has an inseparable connection with freedom of political thought, freedom of political behavior, and freedom of choice, such that the existence of political competition without political freedom is impossible (pp. 102-107). He considers the discussion of political freedom within Islamic culture to be a clear matter (p. 111). The author then mentions and explains the views of some Shia thinkers (such as Muhammad-Taqi Ja'fari, Muhammad Baqir al-Sadr, and Murtada Mutahhari) on Islam's view of freedom (pp. 106-111).
Jurisprudential Foundations of Political Participation
Some Muslim thinkers, emphasizing the rich content of fiqh and its ability to respond to the needs of the time, believe that the jurisprudential foundations of political participation can be extracted from religious texts and jurisprudential theories (p. 116). According to the author, the most important concepts that can form the theoretical basis for the phenomenon of political participation and justify and explain its foundations are:
Consultation (*Shura*)
Sajjadi presents *shura* as one of the important religious teachings and one of the duties of the Islamic government and its officials. According to him, the spread of a culture of consultation in society has benefits that are referred to in modern political literature as the achievements of political participation (pp. 118-119). Sajjadi then quotes the views of some Shia and Sunni jurists on *shura* (pp. 118-124).
Allegiance (*Bay'ah*)
In the author's belief, the legitimacy of a religious government does not depend on the acceptance or rejection of the people, and legitimacy is realized only from God. However, the acceptability of the government, which is realized through the people's allegiance to the leader of the community, has been a matter of concern for religious leaders. Therefore, although the government is legitimate, it is not allowed to use coercion to exercise political sovereignty. For this reason, the author considers the people's support and their presence in the form of political participation to be very important (pp. 124-125).
Advice to the Leaders of the Muslims (*Al-Nasiha li-A'immat al-Muslimin*)
Among the reasons the author cites for the legitimacy of political participation are narrations with the theme of "Advice to the Leaders of the Muslims." The author interprets the Arabic word "nasiha" to mean criticism or suggestion, so that the people can help officials to better implement social and political affairs (p. 133). Relying on his interpretation of this word, the author has addressed the issue of government oversight, controlling political power, and preventing tyranny (pp. 127-132).
Freedom of Criticism and Government Accountability to the People
According to the author, government accountability to the people and freedom of criticism of the government have an important place in Islamic political thought, and to explain it, he has cited sentences from Nahj al-Balagha. The author establishes a two-way relationship between criticism of officials and political participation and partisanship, and then explains the mechanism of oversight of the government and political power (pp. 133-138).
Jurisprudential Foundations of Elections
Sajjadi, referring to the people's right to vote in electing political officials as one of the important indicators of parties, analyzes the religious view on elections through concepts such as allegiance, consultation, rationalism, and social justice (p. 141).
Allegiance (*Bay'ah*)
Referring to the different interpretations of the concept of *bay'ah* (pp. 144-150), he identifies two distinct approaches among Muslims: the Sunni approach, which considers *bay'ah* a method for electing and legitimizing the ruler, and the Shia approach, which considers it a tool for strengthening and making effective the rule of the Prophet (s) and the Imams (a) (p. 151).
However, according to Sajjadi, the views of Shia jurists on *bay'ah* and its legitimizing role for government are not uniform. One group considers *bay'ah* to be comparable to elections in terms of its nature and function and considers *bay'ah* a part of the legitimacy of the religious system in the era of occultation (divine-popular legitimacy). But another group denies any similarity between these two concepts, believing that divine guardianship in managing social and political affairs was delegated to the Prophet (s) and the Imams (a), and then to the qualified jurists (divine legitimacy), and the people have no role in the legitimacy of the government (pp. 152-153).
Consultation (*Shura*)
According to the author, Sunni jurists consider *shura* the basis of the Islamic political system, but Shia jurists, due to their belief in the specific appointment of Imam Ali (a) as the successor to the Prophet (s), relegate it to the level of one of the rational and effective methods of political management. Sajjadi considers *shura* to be undoubtedly established for reaching a better decision or for involving the nation in decision-making, just as some others have considered it one of the self-evident and necessary principles of Islam. According to the author, today *shura* is realized through elections (pp. 156-158).
Rationalism
Sajjadi, based on the rationalism present in Shia fiqh, positively assesses the religious approach to elections. For this purpose, he refers to the rational rules existing in Shia fiqh and then considers elections a rational method derived from human experience, which, if not accompanied by religious impediments, falls into the zone of legislative vacuum (pp. 158-159).
Social Justice
The author, citing verses from the Quran, considers the establishment of social justice to be the most important philosophy behind the mission of the prophets (pp. 162-163). He introduces elections and the general will as tools for achieving social justice (p. 164) and believes that the right to choose and the acceptance of equal opportunities for citizens' participation in the political management of society are necessary theoretical backdrops for the formation of parties (p. 166).
The Party in the Guardianship System (*Nizam-i Wilayi*)
According to the author, there are two opposing approaches regarding the possibility of formulating affirmative foundations for political parties and creating the ground for their external realization. According to the opposing theory, since parties are only formed in a democratic political system and a religious government cannot be democratic, political parties have no place in a guardianship-based government. The author criticizes both premises of this theory and considers it incorrect (p. 177).
In contrast, another group believes that although a religious government does not accept the foundations of democracy, it derives the role of the people in their own political destiny from religious sources and permits the activity of parties within the framework of religious laws and without animosity towards religion. They argue that given the correlation between reason and religious law, there is no need to search for scriptural evidence to prove and legitimize these institutions. The existence of political parties for controlling and supervising power is a rational matter, and in Islam, there is no prohibition on the formation of parties or associations. Also, the existence of civil institutions in a religious government, such as the institution of "*hisbah*" in the government of the Prophet (s), is the best evidence for the permissibility of partisanship and the religion's concern for it (pp. 180-187).
The Impact of Theories of Legitimacy of *Wilayat al-Faqih* on People's Political Participation
According to Sajjadi, the foundations of the political legitimacy of the Guardianship of the Jurist are important because of their direct relationship with the people's involvement in politics, elections, and political parties (p. 195). Therefore, he explains three theories about the foundations of political legitimacy, and in the end, aligns the view of Imam Khomeini with the appointment or combined theory (p. 208), and explains the components of a party from his perspective (pp. 211-221). In his belief, in Imam Khomeini's discourse, the theory of the Guardianship of the Jurist has the capacity to adapt to the needs of the time, and this capacity provides a suitable ground for political parties (p. 208).
The Impact of the Appointment Theory on Limiting Party Activities
Based on the theory of the appointed guardianship of the jurist, which ultimately links the legitimacy of the political leadership of the just jurist to divine command, the legitimacy of other institutions in the government also becomes based on the decree of the Guardian Jurist, and his political guardianship legitimizes the other institutions in the power structure. In this approach, a mere majority vote for the presidency does not bring with it the obligation to obey or legitimacy. According to this theory, although the supervisory role of the people is accepted, because all matters are legitimized by the permission of the Guardian Jurist, political parties and pluralism do not find much scope for activity (pp. 200-202).
The Impact of the Election Theory on Expanding Party Activities
The elective view of the Guardianship of the Jurist, which links political legitimacy to the acceptability and vote of the people, provides greater scope and wider possibility for the formation of civil institutions and political parties. In this approach, where qualified jurists are generally appointed by the Lawgiver to handle political affairs, the people's election, as a means of discovering qualified individuals, legitimizes the political power of the Guardian Jurist (p. 203).
The Combined Theory (Election and Appointment) and the Position of the People
In this view, the legitimacy of the Guardianship of the Jurist is based neither solely on appointment by the Lawgiver nor only on the election and vote of the people. According to this view, the political legitimacy of the Guardianship of the Jurist is based on two foundations: divine and popular. On the one hand, the Lawgiver, through a general appointment, introduces qualified jurists to handle the affairs of the Muslims, and on the other hand, from among the qualified jurists, only the individual whom the people elect enjoys guardianship. In this theory, because the people's vote is considered one of the pillars of political legitimacy, the people and political parties have a significant role (pp. 204-206).