Is it permissible for Muslims to take part in the political systems in the non-Muslim countries where they live as minorities?

Answer

AND COMMENT

At the outset it is imperative to first understand and get it impressed in the mind and on the heart that the first allegiance of the Muslim is to Allah Azza Wa Jal. Muslims should not embark on any project or venture nor participate in any activity which is in conflict with the Shariah. This, however, does not mean that every act of participation in the political system of the country where Muslims live is prohibited. There are different scenarios and circumstances which may compel participation.

But, the type of participation in which Muslim politicians are today involved is decidedly and emphatically haraam. Their participation is to the degree of kufr. When they participate, they abandon even their Imaan. Consider the many 'Muslim' politicians who have joined non-Muslim political parties such as the ANC and DA. They have been elected to act as members of parliament and of the other legislative organs. By joining a non-Muslim political party, acceptance of the rules, principles, slogans, policies, etc. of the party becomes incumbent. A 'Muslim' member of a political party is forced to vote for every proposal of the party. When the party presents a haraam bill to parliament, Muslim members have to vote and toe the party line. Thus, they vote for abortion, same sex 'marriages', homosexuality, lesbianism, haraam/zulm taxation, liquor, prostitution, and any other law which is diametrically in conflict with the Shariah.

Muslim members are practically not allowed to abstain from voting although abstention may exist in theory. It is for this reason that we see that not a single one of the many 'Muslim' members of political parties ever speaking up for Islam or for the Deeni requirements of the Muslim community. If a 'Muslim' happens to be an MP, he will not oppose the party on any haraam bill or proposal. He will not vote against the haraam bill of the party nor will he abstain from voting. We describe them with the term Muslim in inverted commas because they are no longer Muslims. They have sold their Imaan and have become murtadd by supporting fisq, fujoor and kufr.

When a Muslim becomes a party to kufr law-making, then he comes within the purview of the Qur'aanic aayat:

"Those who do not decree according to that (Shariah) which Allah has revealed, verily they are the kaafiroon."

It is never permissible to participate in kufr law-making. Those 'Muslims' who are members of the ANC, DA or whatever non-Muslim party there may be, or even if they are members of so-called 'Muslim' secular parties in Muslim countries, are all murtadds as a result of their participation in the process of fabricating laws which are in conflict with the Shariah.

Our criticism against participation in kuffaar politics is directed more at the effects and consequences than to the instruments of gaining political power. In a non-Muslim country or in a Muslim country governed by murtadds, there is no way by which Muslims could voice themselves constructively for gaining at least some religious rights other than participating in the political system. Provided that haraam is not committed, it will be permissible to make use of the political system to safeguard Muslim rights and the Deen in the same way as it is permissible to utilize the banking facilities of the capitalist riba banks in our situation. Since it has become virtually impossible to conduct business without banking facilities, utilization of such facilities will be permissible to only the degree of need. Thus, while operating a current and savings account will be permissible, it will not be permissible to invest in any of the products of the bank.

The Shariah while granting concession and relaxing its prohibition of haraam due to circumstances, conditions the permissibility with the degree of need. Now if there is a Muslim political party, whether in a Muslim or a non-Muslim country, which will not participate in kufr law-making, and its members in the legislative chambers will at all times oppose haraam bills, and vigorously present and argue for Muslim causes, then it will be permissible to vote for such a party. But, in Muslim countries where there do exist such parties, the vast majority of Muslims do not vote for such parties. Why? Because the vast majority of the miserable so-called 'Muslim' population is murtadd. They abhor the Shariah, but profess themselves to be Muslims. They all come within the scope of the prediction stated in the following Hadith:

"A time will dawn over mankind when people will assemble in their Musaajid. They will perform Salaat (with Jamaa't) while there will not be a single Mu'min among them." If a Muslim party does not peddle and promote the Shariah, and if its members go with way the kuffaar wind blows, supporting the policies and bills of the kuffaar parties as shaitaani expedient dictates, then such a party has no right to designate itself a Muslim party. It will be haraam to vote for it. However, if the party pledges not to violate the Shariah, not to support kufr bills, and to only act according to the Shariah, then it will be permissible to fully support such a party. In fact, in the kufr scenario in which Muslims live all over the world, such a party will be a boon which demands Muslim support.

If in a Muslim country, a genuine Islamic political party could seize power through the ballot or an Islamically inclined military junta is able to stage a coup and grab the instruments of power, then this would be perfectly permissible. But, their long term agenda must be dismantling the kufr political system and the establishment of the Shariah. The kufr political system must give way for Khilaafat as it had existed during the reign of the Khulafa-e-Raashideen. Thus, making use of the system and its instruments of acquiring power is permissible. Violating the Shariah is not permissible. Some members of political parties who also happen to be MPs and members of other legislative bodies even don kurtahs and have long beards and they wear topis whilst they are murtadd. Their outer appearance is a farce. They are frauds who deceive the Muslim community. They are not Muslims. They support every kufr of the party to which they belong. When they die, their bodies should be dumped in the city dumps for vultures to devour. They are Allah's enemies, the enemies of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), the enemies of Islam and the enemies of the Muslim community. To date, none of the many Muslim politicians belonging to non-Muslim political parties has ever opened up their mouths in parliament or elsewhere for any Muslim Cause. If anything, they despise Islamic Causes and the Deeni needs of the community.

When Khalid Rashid was hijacked by sinister forces of America and aided by agencies of the government, and secretly flown out and rendered into one of America's torture facilities, the Muslim community took up the matter. Not a single Muslim politician who had a tongue cared to open his mouth to support the community's clamour for the release of the kidnapped brother. On the contrary, a so-called 'Muslim' member of parliament, a member of a non-Muslim political party, looking like a buzrug with his topi, kurtah and long beard, sought to terrorize Muslims into silence. In all probability, at the behest or command of his party, he tried to influence and scare Ulama into dropping Khalid's case. But, Alhamdulillah, he was given a kick under his pants and told to shut his trap.

With regard to voting for non-Muslim candidates who are favourably inclined to Muslims, this will be permissible, and in some instances incumbent. For example, in India it is necessary to vote for the Hindu secular party which does not profess antagonism for Muslims and who proclaim religious freedom. The need is on account of the existence of a Hindu verkrampte party whose avowed policy is to forcibly convert Muslims to Hinduism and to convert all the Musaajid into Hindu temples. Where there is no genuine need, it will not be permissible to vote.

We hope this explanation answers your queries. Should you require more clarification, do not hesitate to pose your questions. Just remember that the criterion of Muslims is only the Shariah. The means, provided they are not in violation of the Shariah, may be employed to gain a Shar'i objective. In some cases, e.g. where power is grabbed by a military junta or an Islamic party is voted into power, it will devolve on them to institute the Islamic system of Khilaafat. This is a separate and detailed subject which is not the purpose of this discussion.