Examine individual changes

'{{Use mdy dates|date=December 2015}}<!-- mmm dd, yyyy per first main contributor; yyyy-mm-dd for archive and access dates --> {{Islamism sidebar|Concepts}} {{Islam and other religions}} {{Democracy}} '''Islamic democracy''' is a political ideology that seeks to apply [[Islam]]ic principles to [[public policy]] within a [[democracy|democratic]] framework. Islamic political theory specifies three basic features of an Islamic democracy: leaders must be elected by the people, subject to [[sharia]] and committed to practicing "shura", a special form of consultation practiced by Muhammad, which one can find in various hadiths, with their community.<ref>{{cite journal |first=Najib |last=Ghadbian |date=July 6, 2003 |title=Democracy or Self-Interest? |url=http://hir.harvard.edu/chinademocracy-or-self-interest/ |journal=Harvard International Review |accessdate=2011-10-19}}</ref> Countries which fulfil the three basic features include [[Pakistan]] and [[Malaysia]]. [[Saudi Arabia]], [[Qatar]] and the [[United Arab Emirates]] are examples of countries that do ''not'' adhere to the principles of Islamic democracy despite being Islamic countries, as these countries do not hold elections. The expression of Islamic democracy is different in the Muslim majority countries, as sharia interpretations vary from country to country, and the use of sharia is more comprehensive in countries in which sharia forms the basis for state laws. The concepts of liberalism and democratic participation were already present in the [[Islamic Golden Age|medieval Islamic world]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Weeramantry |first=Christopher G. |date=1997 |title=Justice Without Frontiers: Furthering Human Rights |publisher=Kluwer Law International |location=The Hague |pages=134–5 |isbn=90-411-0241-8}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Sullivan |first=Antony T. |date=January–February 1997 |title=Istanbul Conference Traces Islamic Roots of Western Law, Society |url=http://www.wrmea.org/1997-january-february/istanbul-conference-traces-islamic-roots-of-western-law-society.html |journal=[[Washington Report on Middle East Affairs]] |page=36 |accessdate=2008-02-29}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Goodman |first=Lenn Evan |date=2003 |title=Islamic Humanism |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |page=155 |isbn=0-19-513580-6}}</ref> The [[Rashidun Caliphate]] is perceived by its proponents as an early example of a democratic state and it is claimed that the development of democracy in the Islamic world eventually came to a halt following to the [[Shia–Sunni relations|Sunni–Shia split]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=al-Hibri |first=Azizah Y. |title=Islamic and American Constitutional Law: Borrowing Possibilities or a History of Borrowing |journal=[[University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law]] |volume=1 |issue=3 |year=1998–1999 |pages=492–527 [507–25]}}</ref> ==Sunni viewpoint== {{See also|Political aspects of Islam|Islamism|Shura}} Deliberations of the [[Caliphate]]s, most notably the Rashidun Caliphate were not democratic in the modern sense rather, decision-making power lay with a council of notable and [[Sahabah|trusted companions]] of [[Muhammad]] and representatives of different tribes (most of them selected or elected within their tribes).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.islamonline.net/English/introducingislam/politics/Politics/article04.shtml |title=Forming an Islamic Democracy |last=Sultan |first=Sohaib N. |date=September 27, 2004 |website=IslamOnline.net |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20041001023746/http://www.islamonline.net/English/introducingislam/politics/Politics/article04.shtml |archive-date=2004-10-01}}</ref> In the early Islamic Caliphate, the head of state, the [[Caliph]], had a position based on the notion of a [[Succession to Muhammad|successor to Muhammad's]] political authority, who, according to [[Sunni Islam|Sunnis]], were ideally elected by the people or their representatives,<ref>''Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World'' (2004), vol. 1, p. 116-123.</ref> as was the case for [[Abu Bakr|the election of Abu Bakr]],Umar bin Alkhattab, [[the election of Uthman|Uthman]], and [[Ali as Caliph]]. After the [[Rashidun]] Caliphs, later Caliphates during the Islamic Golden Age had a much lesser degree of democratic participation, but since "no one was superior to anyone else except on the basis of piety and virtue" in Islam, and following the example of Muhammad, later Islamic rulers often held [[public consultation]]s with the people in their affairs.<ref>{{cite book |last=Weeramantry |first=Christopher G. |date=1997 |title=Justice Without Frontiers: Furthering Human Rights |publisher=Kluwer Law International |location=The Hague |pages=135 |isbn=90-411-0241-8}}}</ref> The legislative power of the Caliph (or later, the [[Sultan]]) was always restricted by the scholarly class, the ''[[ulama]]'', a group regarded as the guardians of the law. Since the law came from the legal scholars, this prevented the Caliph from dictating legal results. Laws were decided based on the ''[[ijma]]'' (consensus) of the [[Ummah]] (community), which was most often represented by the legal scholars.<ref name=Feldman2008>{{cite news |last=Feldman |first=Noah |date=March 16, 2008 |title=Why Shariah? |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?ei=5070&em=&en=5c1b8de536ce606f&ex=1205812800&pagewanted=all |newspaper=The New York Times |accessdate=2008-10-05}}</ref> In order to qualify as a legal scholar, it was required that they obtain a doctorate known as the ''[[Ijazah|ijazat attadris wa 'l-ifttd]]'' ("license to teach and issue legal opinions") from a ''[[madrasa]]''.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Makdisi |first=George |date=April–June 1989 |title=Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West |journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society |volume=109 |issue=2 |pages=175–182 [175–77] |doi=10.2307/604423}}</ref> In many ways, classical Islamic law functioned like a [[constitutional law]].<ref name=Feldman2008/> Democratic [[religious pluralism]] also existed in classical Islamic law, as the [[religious law]]s and courts of other religions, including Christianity, [[Judaism]] and [[Hinduism]], were usually accommodated within the Islamic legal framework, as seen in the early Caliphate, [[Al-Andalus]], [[Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent|Islamic India]], and the [[Millet (Ottoman Empire)|Ottoman Millet]] system.<ref>{{cite book |last=Weeramantry |first=Christopher G. |date=1997 |title=Justice Without Frontiers: Furthering Human Rights |publisher=Kluwer Law International |location=The Hague |pages=138 |isbn=90-411-0241-8}}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Sachedina |first=Abdulaziz |date=2001 |title=The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism |location=New York |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=0-19-513991-7}}</ref>{{page needed|date=December 2015}} Legal scholar L. Ali Khan 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 in Islam|God's]] universe, says Khan. Contradictions represent the limited knowledge that human beings have. According to the [[Quran]] and the [[Sunnah]], Muslims are fully capable of preserving spirituality and self-rule.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://hosted.law.wisc.edu/wilj/abstracts/161.htm |title=Abstracts: A Theory of Universal Democracy |website=University of Wisconsin Law School |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111006135755/http://hosted.law.wisc.edu/wilj/abstracts/161.htm |archive-date=2011-10-06 |accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref> Furthermore, counter arguments to these points assert that this attitude presuppose democracy as a static system which only embraces a particular type of [[society|social]] and [[Culture|cultural]] system, namely that of the post-Christian West. {{citation needed|date=January 2015}} ''See: [[constitutional theocracy]]''. Muslim democrats, including [[Ahmad Moussalli]] (professor of [[political science]] at the [[American University of Beirut]]), argue that concepts in the Quran 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'' ([[Al Imran]] - Quran 3:159, [[Ash-Shura]] - Quran 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 God. This viewpoint, however, is disputed by more traditional Muslims. Moussalli argues that despotic Islamic governments have abused the Quranic 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). Much debate occurs on the subject of which Islamic traditions are fixed principles, and which are subject to democratic change, or other forms of modification in view of changing circumstances. Some [[Muslim]]s allude to an "Islamic" style of democracy which would recognize such distinctions.<ref>{{cite news |date=July 8, 2006 |title=Muslim world needs democracy, says Qaradawi |url=http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=11311 |newspaper=The Muslim News |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060823013638/http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=11311 |archive-date=2006-08-23}}</ref> Another sensitive issue involves the status of monarchs and other leaders, the degree of loyalty which Muslims owe such people, and what to do in case of a conflicting loyalties (e.g., if a monarch disagrees with an [[imam]]). ==Shia viewpoint== According to the [[Shia]] understanding, Muhammad named as his successor (as leader, with Muhammad being the [[Last prophet|final prophet]]), his son-in-law and cousin [[Ali]]. Therefore, the first three of the four elected "Rightly Guided" Caliphs recognized by Sunnis ('Ali being the fourth), are considered usurpers, notwithstanding their having been "elected" through some sort of conciliar deliberation (which the Shia do not accept as a representative of the Muslim society of that time). The largest Shia grouping — the [[Twelver]]s branch — recognizes a series of [[The Twelve Imams|Twelve Imams]], the last of which ([[Muhammad al-Mahdi]], the Hidden Imam) is still alive and the Shia are waiting for his reappearance. Since the [[Iranian Revolution|revolution in Iran]], the largest Shia country, Twelver Shia political thought has been dominated by that of [[Ayatollah]] [[Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist|Ruhollah Khomeini]], the founder and leader of the revolution. Khomeini argued that in the absence of the Hidden Imam and other divinely-appointed figures (in whom ultimate political authority rests), Muslims have not only the right, but also the obligation to establish an "[[Islamic state]]."<ref>[http://quest4truth.weebly.com/imam-03.html] {{Dead link|date=March 2013}}</ref> To that end they must turn to scholars of Islamic law ([[fiqh]]) who are qualified to interpret the Quran and the writings of the imams. Khomeini distinguishes between [[Ja'fari jurisprudence|Conventional Fiqh]] and Dynamic Fiqh, which he believes to also be necessary. Khomeini divided the Islamic commandments or [[Ahkam]] into three branches: * the primary commandments ({{lang-fa|حكم اوليه}}) * the secondary commandments ({{lang-fa|حكم ثانويه}}) and * the state commandments ({{lang-fa|حكم حكومتي}}). This list includes all commandments which relate to public affairs, such as constitutions, [[social security]], [[Takaful|insurance]], [[Islamic banking|bank]], [[labour law]], taxation, elections, [[congress]], etc. Some of these codes may not strictly or implicitly pointed out in the Quran and generally in the Sunnah, but should not violate any of the two, unless there's a collision of rules in which the more important one is given preference (an apparent, but not inherent, violation of a rule).{{citation needed|date=January 2015}} Once in power and recognizing the need for more flexibility, Khomeini modified some earlier positions, insisted the ruling jurist need not be one of the most learned, that ''Sharia'' rule was subordinate to interests of Islam ([[Maslaha]] - `expedient interests` or `public welfare`<ref>Abrahamian, Ervand, ''A History of Modern Iran'', Cambridge University Press, 2008, p.165</ref>), and the "divine government" as interpreted by the ruling jurists, who could overrule Sharia if necessary to serve those interests. The Islamic "government, which is a branch of the absolute governance of the Prophet of God, is among the primary ordinances of [[Islam]], and has precedence over all `secondary` ordinances." The last point was made in December 1987, when Khomieni issued a fatwa in support of the Islamic government's attempt to pass a labor protection bill not in accordance with sharia.<ref>Schirazi, Asghar. ''The Constitution of Iran'', p.212</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://gemsofislamism.tripod.com/khomeini_promises_kept.html#footnote_72a|title=Khomeini's REVERSALS of Promises|publisher= |accessdate=2015-05-04}}</ref> He ruled that in the Islamic state, governmental ordinances were primary ordinances,<ref>{{cite book|last1=Marty|first1=Martin E.|title=Fundamentalisms and the State: Remaking Polities, Economies, and Militance|chapter=Shi'ite Jurisprudence and Constitution Making in the Islamic Republic of Iran by Said Amir Arjomand|date=1993|publisher=University of Chicago Press|page=104|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=doCmVaOnh_wC&pg=PA104&lpg=PA104&dq=Khomeini+primary+ordinances+secondary+ordinances&source=bl&ots=NNsA1C2I6r&sig=Ep7WMFSU76xXM_0d9eegtrD7mkc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JJ2RVdVgjbSiBIuqgrAO&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Khomeini%20primary%20ordinances%20secondary%20ordinances&f=false }}</ref> and that the Islamic state has absolute right ({{lang-fa|ولايت مطلقه}}) to enact state commandments, taking precedence over "all secondary ordinances such as prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage". <blockquote>Were the powers of government to lie only within the framework of secondary divine decrees, the designation of the divine government and absolute deputed guardianship (''wilayat-i mutlaqa-yi mufawwada'') to the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his progeny) would have been in practice entirely without meaning and content. ... I must point out, the government which is a branch of the absolute governance of the Prophet of God is among the primary ordinances of Islam, and has precedence over all secondary ordinances such as [[salat|prayer (salat)]], [[sawm|fasting (sawm)]], and [[hajj|pilgrimage (hajj)]].</blockquote> Other deviations from strict sharia law have been noted in the largest Shia-majority state: <blockquote> ... the financial system has barely been Islamized; Christians, for example, are not subject to a poll tax and pay according to the common scheme. Insurance is maintained (even though chance, the very basis for insurance should theoretically be excluded from all contracts). The contracts signed with foreigners all accept the matter of interest.<ref>The Failure of Political Islam, by Olivier Roy, translated by Carol Volk, Harvard University Press, 1994, p.139-40</ref></blockquote> ==Philosophical viewpoint== The [[Early Islamic philosophy|early Islamic philosopher]], [[Al-Farabi]] (c. 872-950), in one of his most notable works ''Al-Madina al-Fadila'', theorized an ideal Islamic state which he compared to [[Plato]]'s ''[[The Republic (Plato)|The Republic]]''.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/arabic-islamic-natural |title=Arabic and Islamic Natural Philosophy and Natural Science |website=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]]}}</ref> Al-Farabi departed from the [[Platonism|Platonic]] view in that he regarded the ideal state to be ruled by the [[Prophets in Islam|prophet]], instead of the [[philosopher king]] envisaged by Plato. Al-Farabi argued that the ideal state was the [[city-state]] of [[Medina]] when it was governed by Muhammad, as its [[head of state]], as he was in direct communion with God whose law was revealed to him. In the absence of the prophet, Al-Farabi considered democracy as the closest to the ideal state, regarding the republican order of the Rashidun Caliphate as an example within early [[History of Islam|Muslim history]]. However, he also maintained that it was from democracy that imperfect states emerged, noting how the republican order of the early Islamic Caliphate of the Rashidun caliphs was later replaced by a form of government resembling a monarchy under the [[Umayyad Caliphate|Umayyad]] and [[Abbasid Caliphate|Abbasid]] dynasties.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bontekoe |first1=Ronald |last2=Stepaniants |first2=Mariėtta Tigranovna |date=1997 |title=Justice and Democracy: Cross-Cultural Perspectives |publisher=University of Hawaii Press |page=251 |isbn=0-8248-1926-8}}</ref> A thousand years later, the modern [[Islamic philosophy|Islamic philosopher]], [[Muhammad Iqbal]], also viewed the early Islamic Caliphate as being compatible with democracy. He "welcomed the formation of popularly elected [[Legislative Assembly|legislative assemblies]]" in the Muslim world as a "return to the original purity of Islam." He argued that Islam had the "gems of an economic and democratic organization of society", but that this growth was stunted by the monarchist rule of Umayyad Caliphate, which established the Caliphate as a great Islamic empire but led to [[Political aspects of Islam|political Islamic]] ideals being "[[Paganism|repaganized]]" and the early Muslims losing sight of the "most important potentialities of their faith."<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bontekoe |first1=Ronald |last2=Stepaniants |first2=Mariėtta Tigranovna |date=1997 |title=Justice and Democracy: Cross-Cultural Perspectives |publisher=University of Hawaii Press |page=253 |isbn=0-8248-1926-8}}</ref> Another Muslim scholar and thinker, [[Muhammad Asad]], viewed [[Democracy]] as perfectly compatible with [[Islam]]. In his book ''[[The Principles of State and Government in Islam]]'', he notes: <blockquote>Viewed from this historical perspective, 'democracy' as conceived in the modern West is infinitely nearer to the [[Islamic]] than to the ancient [[Ancient Greece|Greek]] concept of [[liberty]]; for Islam maintains that all human beings are socially equal and must, therefore, be given the same opportunities for development and self-expression. On the other hand, Islam makes it incumbent upon Muslims to subordinate their decisions to the guidance of the Divine Law revealed in the [[Quran|Qur'ãn]] and exemplified by the [[Muhammad|Prophet]]: an obligation which imposes definite limits on the community's right to legislate and denies to the 'will of the people' that attribute of [[sovereignty]] which forms so integral a part of the [[Liberal democracy|Western concept of democracy]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Muhammad Quote from his book.|url=http://www.honestthinking.org/en/quotes.html}}</ref></blockquote> Islamist writer and politician [[Abul A'la Maududi]], conceived of an "[[Islamic state]]" that would be an "Islamic democracy" and would eventually "rule the earth".<ref>{{cite book|last1=Maududi|first1=Sayyid Abdul al'al|title=Political Theory of Islam|date=1960|publisher=Islamic Publications|location=Lahore, Pakistan|page=35|edition=1993|quote=the power to rule over the earth has been promised to ''the whole community of believers''. [italics original]}}</ref> The antithesis of secular Western democracy, it would follow an all-embracing Sharia law, but would be a "theodemocracy", not a [[theocracy]], because its rule would be based on the entire Muslim community (pious Muslims who followed sharia), not the ''[[ulema]]'' (Islamic scholars).<ref>{{cite book |last=Ullah |first=Haroon K. |date=2013 |title=Vying for Allah's Vote: Understanding Islamic Parties, Political Violence, and Extremism in Pakistan |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=luiVAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA79 |publisher=Georgetown University Press |page=79 |isbn=978-1-62616-015-6}}</ref> Maududi's vision has been criticized (by Youssef M. Choueiri) as an <blockquote>ideological state in which legislators do not legislate, citizens only vote to reaffirm the permanent applicability of God's laws, women rarely venture outside their homes lest social discipline be disrupted, and non-Muslims are tolerated as foreign elements required to express their loyalty by means of paying a financial levy.<ref>Choueiri, p.111, quoted in {{cite book|last1=Ruthven|first1=Malise|title=Islam in the World|date=2000|publisher=Penguin|page=70|edition=2nd}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|last1=Choueiri|first1=Youssef M.|title=Islamic Fundamentalism : The Story of Islamist Movements|date=2010|publisher=Bloomsbury, A&C Black|page=144|edition=3rd|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=pgmc35nCzjIC&pg=PA144&dq=%22ideological+state+in+which+legislators+do+not+legislate%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3MiyVNK0FoeYyQTu_ICYDQ&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22ideological%20state%20in%20which%20legislators%20do%20not%20legislate%22&f=false}}</ref></blockquote> ==Islamic democracy in practice== ===Obstacles=== {{See also|Democracy in the Middle East}} Waltz writes that transformations to democracy seemed on the whole to pass by the Islamic Middle East at a time when such transformations were a central theme in other parts of the world, although she does note that, of late, the increasing number of elections being held in the region indicates some form of adoption of democratic traditions.<ref>Waltz, S.E., 1995, ''Human Rights & Reform: Changing the Face of North African Politics'', London, University of California Press Ltd</ref> There are several ideas on the relationship between Islam in the Middle East and democracy. Writing on [[The Guardian]] website,<ref name="Guardian15Mar2004">{{cite news |last=Whitaker |first=Brian |date=March 15, 2004 |title=Beware instant democracy |url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,,1169776,00.html |newspaper=The Guardian |accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref> [[Brian Whitaker]], the paper's Middle East editor, argued that there were four major obstacles to democracy in the region: the [[Colonialism|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. Acknowledgment of these differences is frequently suppressed usually in the cause of "national unity" and sometimes to obscure the fact that minority elite is controlling the country. Brian Whitaker argues that this leads to the formation of political 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 [[petroleum|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. This can be linked into [[political economy]] explanations for the occurrence of [[Authoritarianism|authoritarian]] regimes and lack of democracy in the Middle East, particularly the prevalence of [[rentier state]]s in the Middle East.<ref>Beblawi, H., 1990, The Rentier State in the Arab World, in Luciani, G., ''The Arab State'', London, Routledge</ref> A consequence of the lack of taxation that Whitaker talks of in such rentier economies is an inactive [[civil society]]. As civil society is seen to be an integral part of democracy it raises doubts over the feasibility of democracy developing in the Middle East in such situations.<ref name="Weiffen2004">{{cite journal |last=Weiffen |first=Britta |date=2004 |url=http://www.dur.ac.uk/john.ashworth/EPCS/Papers/Weiffen.pdf |title=The Cultural-Economic Syndrome: Impediments to Democracy in the Middle East |journal=Comparative Sociology |volume=3 |issue=3 |doi=10.1163/1569133043019780 |via=European Public Choice Society (EPCS) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090306112042/http://www.dur.ac.uk/john.ashworth/EPCS/Papers/Weiffen.pdf |archive-date=2009-03-06}}</ref> Whitaker's third point is that the [[Arab people|Arab]]–[[Israelis|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]] [[Mohammad Hussein 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 US, is also seen as a supporter of [[Israel]], and so it and its institutions, including democracy, are seen by many Muslims as suspect. [[Khaled Abou El Fadl]], a lecturer in Islamic law at the [[University of California]] comments "modernity, despite its much scientific advancement, reached Muslims packaged in the ugliness of disempowerment and alienation." This repression by [[Secularism|secularist]] 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.<ref name="Guardian15Mar2004" /> [[Oriental studies|Orientalist]] scholars offer another viewpoint on the relationship between Islam and [[Democratization|democratisation]] in the Middle East. They argue that the compatibility is simply not there between secular democracy and Arab-Islamic culture in the Middle East which has a strong history of undemocratic beliefs and authoritarian power structures.<ref name="Weiffen2004" /> [[Elie Kedourie|Kedourie]], a well known Orientalist scholar, said for example: "to hold simultaneously ideas which are not easily reconcilable argues, then, a deep confusion in the Arab public mind, at least about the meaning of democracy. The confusion is, however, understandable since the idea of democracy is quite alien to the mind-set of Islam."<ref>Kedourie, E., 1994, ''Democracy and Arab Political Culture'', London, Frank Cass & Co Ltd, page 1</ref> A view similar to this that understands Islam and democracy to be incompatible because of seemingly irreconcilable differences between Sharia and democratic ideals is also held by some Islamists. However, within Islam there are ideas held by some that believe Islam and democracy in some form are indeed compatible due to the existence of the concept of ''[[shura]]'' (meaning consultation) in the Quran. Views such as this have been expressed by various thinkers and political activists in the Middle East.<ref>Esposito, J. & Voll, J.,2001, Islam and Democracy, ''Humanities'', Volume 22, Issue 6</ref> They continue to be the subject of controversy, e.g. at the second [[Dubai Debates]], which debated the question "Can Arab and Islamic values be reconciled with democracy?"<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeFwArelc04|title=Can Arab and Islamic values be reconciled with democracy?|work=YouTube |accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref> Following the [[Arab Spring]], professor [[Olivier Roy (professor)|Olivier Roy]] of the [[European University Institute]] in an article in ''[[Foreign Policy]]'' has described [[Islamism|political Islam]] as "increasingly interdependent" with democracy, such that "neither can now survive without the other".<ref>{{cite journal |last=Roy |first=Olivier |date= April 16, 2012 |title=The New Islamists |url=http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2012/04/16/the_new_islamists |journal=Foreign Policy}}</ref> ===Practice=== {{see also|List of Islamic democratic political parties}} * The [[Green Algeria Alliance]] is an Islamist coalition of political parties, created for the [[Algerian legislative election, 2012|legislative election, 2012]] in Algeria. It consists of the [[Movement of Society for Peace]] (Hamas), [[Islamic Renaissance Movement]] (Ennahda) and the [[Movement for National Reform]] (Islah).<ref>{{cite journal |last=Slimani |first=Salah |date=May 10, 2012 |title=Islamists Predict Victory as Algerians Head to the Polls |url=http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-05-10/islamists-predict-victory-as-algerians-head-to-the-polls |work=Bloomberg Businessweek |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120518082127/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-05-10/islamists-predict-victory-as-algerians-head-to-the-polls |archive-date=2012-05-18}}</ref> The alliance is led by [[Bouguerra Soltani]] of the Hamas.<ref>{{cite news |date=May 7, 2012 |title=Algeria's Islamists confident of election victory |url=http://www.rnw.nl/africa/bulletin/algerias-islamists-confident-election-victory |work=[[RNW]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141025141341/http://www.rnw.nl/africa/bulletin/algerias-islamists-confident-election-victory |archive-date=2014-10-25}}</ref> However, the incumbent coalition, consisting of the [[National Liberation Front (Algeria)|FLN]] of President [[Abdelaziz Bouteflika]] and the [[National Rally for Democracy (Algeria)|RND]] of Prime Minister [[Ahmed Ouyahia]], held on to power after winning a majority of seats and the Islamist parties of the Green Algeria Alliance lost seats in legislative election of 2012.<ref>{{cite news |first=Paul |last=Schemm |date=May 11, 2012 |title=Algerian Islamists fall to govt party in election |url=https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1A1-3113123ecd1d45dea53d5b125f0bae33.html |agency=Associated Press |via=[[HighBeam Research]] |subscription=yes}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Benoît |last=Faucon |date=May 11, 2012 |title=Algerian Ruling Party Beats Islamists in Vote |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304543904577398253928469254.html?mod=googlenews_wsj |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal}}</ref> * Shia Islamist [[Al Wefaq National Islamic Society|Al Wefaq]], [[Salafi]] Islamist [[Al Asalah]] and Sunni Islamist [[Al-Menbar Islamic Society]] are dominant democratic forces in [[Bahrain]].<ref>{{cite news |date=February 15, 2011 |title=Guide to Bahrain's politics |url=http://www.theguardian.com/world/us-embassy-cables-documents/168471 |newspaper=The Guardian}}</ref> * During the [[Bangladesh Liberation War]], the [[Jamaat-e-Islami Pakistan|Jamaat-e-Islami]] of Pakistan opposed the independence of [[Bangladesh]], but established itself there as an independent political party, the [[Bangladesh Jamaat-e-Islami]] after 1975.<ref>{{cite news |date=December 30, 2008 |title=The Tenacity of Hope |url=http://www.economist.com/node/12855437 |work=The Economist |accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=July 1, 2010 |title=Blighted at birth |url=http://www.economist.com/node/16485517?zid=309&ah=80dcf288b8561b012f603b9fd9577f0e |work=The Economist}}</ref> The [[Bangladesh Nationalist Party]] is the second largest party in the [[Jatiyo Sangshad|Parliament of Bangladesh]] and the main opposition party. The BNP promotes a [[Centre-right|center-right]] policy combining elements of conservatism, Islamism, nationalism and anti-communism. The party believes that Islam is an integral part of the socio-cultural life of Bangladesh, and favors Islamic principles and cultural views. Since 2000, it has been allied with the Islamic parties Jamaat-e-Islami Bangladesh and [[Islami Oikya Jote]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Riaz |first=Ali |date=2003 |title="God Willing": The Politics and Ideology of Islamism in Bangladesh |url=http://cssaame.dukejournals.org/cgi/pdf_extract/23/1-2/301 |journal=Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East |volume=23 |issue=1-2 |doi=10.1215/1089201X-23-1-2-301}}</ref> * The [[Party of Democratic Action]] is the largest political party in [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]]. The Party of Democratic Action was founded in May 1990 by reformist Islamist [[Alija Izetbegović]],<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3133038.stm |title=Obituary: Alija Izetbegovic |publisher=BBC |date=October 19, 2003 | accessdate=2010-01-01}}</ref> representing the conservative [[Bosniaks]] and other [[Slavic Muslims|Slavic Muslim]] population in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the former [[Yugoslavia]].<ref>{{cite news |last=Binder |first=David |date=October 20, 2003 |title=Alija Izetbegović, Muslim Who Led Bosnia, Dies at 78 |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/20/world/alija-izetbegovic-muslim-who-led-bosnia-dies-at-78.html |newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref> * In the [[Egyptian parliamentary election, 2011–2012]], the political parties identified as "Islamist" and "democratic" (the [[Muslim Brotherhood]]'s [[Freedom and Justice Party (Egypt)|Freedom and Justice Party]], Salafist [[Al-Nour Party]] and liberal Islamist [[Al-Wasat Party]]) won 75% of the total seats.<ref>{{cite news |last=Kirkpatrick |first=David D. |date=January 21, 2012 |title=Islamists Win 70% of Seats in the Egyptian Parliament |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/world/middleeast/muslim-brotherhood-wins-47-of-egypt-assembly-seats.html |newspaper=The New York Times}}</ref> [[Mohamed Morsi]], an Islamist democrat of the Muslim Brotherhood was the first democratically elected president of [[Egypt]].{{Citation needed|date=February 2013}} * [[Nahdlatul Ulama]] and [[Muhammadiyah]] are two very influential Islamist social movement in [[Indonesia]]. [[National Awakening Party]], [[United Development Party]] and [[Prosperous Justice Party]] are major Indonesian Islamist parties, active in country's democratic process.<ref>Evans, Kevin R (2003). ''The history of political parties & general elections in Indonesia''. Jakarta:Arise Consultancies.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last= Schwarz, |first= Adam|title= A Nation in Waiting: Indonesia in the 1990s |year= 1994 |publisher= Allen & Unwin |pages= 172 |isbn=0-521-77326-1}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Dhume |first=Sadanand |date=December 1, 2005 |title=Indonesian Democracy's Enemy Within |url=http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/indonesian-democracy%E2%80%99s-enemy-within |journal=[[YaleGlobal Online]]}}</ref> * The [[Islamic Action Front]] is [[Jordan]]'s Islamist political party and largest democratic political force in country. The IAF's survival in Jordan is primarily due to its flexibility and less radical approach to politics.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EC07Ak01.html|title=Jordan's Islamic Front rallies Muslims|publisher= |accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref> * The [[Islamic Group (Lebanon)|Islamic Group]] is a Sunni Islamist and [[Hezbollah]] is a Shia Islamist political party in Lebanon.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Hamzeh |first=A. Nizar |date=1997 |title=Islamism in Lebanon: A Guide to the Groups |url=http://www.meforum.org/362/islamism-in-lebanon-a-guide-to-the-groups |journal=[[Middle East Quarterly]] |volume=4 |pages=47-53}}</ref> * The [[Justice and Construction Party]] is the Muslim Brotherhood's political arm in [[Libya]] and the second largest political force in the country.<ref>{{cite news |date=March 3, 2012 |title=Muslim Brotherhood formally launches party |newspaper=Libya Herald |url=http://www.libyaherald.com/muslim-brotherhood-formally-launches-party/ |accessdate=2012-03-08 |subscription=yes}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Dominique |last=Soguel |date=March 4, 2012 |title=Muslim Brother picked to lead new Libya party |url=http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20120304/world/Muslim-Brother-picked-to-lead-new-Libya-party.409595 |work=Times of Malta |agency=Agence France-Presse |accessdate=2012-03-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Haimzadeh |first=Patrick |date=July 3, 2012 |title=Libya's Unquiet Election |url=http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=53172 |newspaper=Middle East Online }}</ref> [[National Forces Alliance]], largest political group in country, doesn't believe the country should be run entirely by Sharia law or [[Secularity|secular]] law, but does hold that Sharia should be "the main inspiration for legislation." Party leader Jibril has said the NFA is a moderate Islamic movement that recognises the importance of [[Islam]] in political life and favours Sharia as the basis of the law.<ref>{{cite news |last=Grant |first=George |date=July 1, 2012 |title=Party Profile: The National Forces Alliance |url=http://www.libyaherald.com/2012/07/01/party-profile-the-national-forces-alliance/ |newspaper=Libya Herald |subscription=yes}}</ref> * The [[United Malays National Organisation]] is the dominant party of Malaysia since that county's independence in 1957. UMNO sees and defines itself as a moderate Islamist, Islamic democratic and [[Social conservatism|social conservative]] party of Muslim [[Malaysian Malay|Malays]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://umno-online.com/?page_id=2787 |title=Perlembagaan |language=ms |website=UMNO Online |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120229132114/http://umno-online.com/?page_id=2787 |archive-date=2012-02-29 |quote=: Goal 3.3 and 3.5}}</ref> The [[Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party]] is a major [[Opposition (politics)|opposition]] party and is relatively more conservative and traditionalist than the UMNO.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://pas.org.my/v2/kertaskerja/AGS_Penjenamaan_Islam2.pdf |title=ISLAM HADHARI: Antara Pemalsuan dan Bid’ah |website=Parti Islam Se Malaysia (PAS) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120311001332/http://pas.org.my/v2/kertaskerja/AGS_Penjenamaan_Islam2.pdf |archive-date=2012-03-11}}</ref>{{third-party-inline|date=February 2013}} * The Moroccan [[Justice and Development Party (Morocco)|Justice and Development Party]] has been the ruling party in [[Morocco]] since November 29, 2011. The Justice and Development Party advocates Islamism and Islamic democracy.<ref>{{cite news |last=Chen |first=Cherice |date=November 25, 2011 |title=Morocco votes in first election since protests; Islamist party eyes victory |url=http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1769378 |work=[[Taiwan News]] |accessdate=2011-11-25}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Alami |first=Aida |date=November 25, 2011 |title=Moroccans Vote in Election Marking Shift of Power From King |url=http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-25/moroccans-vote-in-election-marking-shift-of-power-from-king.html |work=[[Bloomberg Businessweek]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130604161427/http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-25/moroccans-vote-in-election-marking-shift-of-power-from-king.html |archive-date=2013-06-04 |accessdate=2011-11-25}}</ref> * The [[Muslim Brotherhood of Syria]] is a Sunni Islamist force in [[Syria]] and very loosely affiliated to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. It has also been called the "dominant group" or "dominant force" in the Arab Spring uprising in Syria.<ref>{{cite news |last=Sly |first=Liz |date=May 12, 2012 |title=Syria's Muslim Brotherhood is gaining influence over anti-Assad revolt |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/syrias-muslim-brotherhood-is-gaining-influence-over-anti-assad-revolt/2012/05/12/gIQAtIoJLU_story.html |newspaper=[[Washington Post]]}}</ref> The group's stated political positions are moderate and in its most recent April 2012 manifesto it "pledges to respect individual rights", to promote pluralism and democracy.<ref>{{cite news |last=Oweis |first=Khaled Yacoub |date=May 6, 2012 |title=Syria's Muslim Brotherhood rise from the ashes |url=http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/06/us-syria-brotherhood-idUSBRE84504R20120506 |newspaper=Reuters}}</ref> * The [[Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan]] is [[Tajikistan]]'s Islamist party and main opposition and democratic force in that country.<ref>"Mountain Rigger", ''[[The Economist]]'', November 11, 2006</ref> * The [[Ennahda Movement]], also known as Renaissance Party or simply Ennahda, is a moderate Islamist political party in [[Tunisia]].<ref>{{cite news |date=March 1, 2011 |title=Tunisia legalises Islamist group Ennahda |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12611609 |work=[[BBC News Online]] |accessdate=2011-06-24}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Roula |last=Khalaf |date=April 27, 2011 |title=Tunisian Islamists seek poll majority |url=http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/20208be6-70e1-11e0-9b1d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1QD6AeB85 |newspaper=[[Financial Times]] |accessdate=2011-06-24 |subscription=yes}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |date=January 20, 2011 |title=Tunisian leader returns from exile |url=http://english.aljazeera.net/news/africa/2011/01/2011130111220856971.html |work=[[Al Jazeera English]] |accessdate=2011-06-24}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Matthew |last=Kaminski |date=October 26, 2011 |title=On the Campaign Trail With Islamist Democrats |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204777904576651361230968584.html?mod=googlenews_wsj |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |accessdate=2011-10-26}}</ref> On March 1, 2011, after the government of [[Zine El Abidine Ben Ali]] collapsed in the wake of the 2011 [[Tunisian revolution]], Tunisia's interim government granted the group permission to form a political party. Since then it has become the biggest and most well-organized party in Tunisia, so far outdistancing its more secular competitors. In the [[Tunisian Constituent Assembly election, 2011]], the first honest election in the country's history with a turn out of 51.1% of all eligible voters, the party won 37.04% of the popular vote and 89 (41%) of the 217 assembly seats, far more than any other party.<ref>{{cite news |last=Feldman |first=Noah |date=October 30, 2011 |title=Islamists' Victory in Tunisia a Win for Democracy: Noah Feldman |url=http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-30/islamists-victory-in-tunisia-a-win-for-democracy-noah-feldman.html |work=[[Bloomberg View]] |accessdate=2011-10-31}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last = ISIE | first = High and Independent Instance for the Elections. | title = Decree of 23 Nov. 2011 about the Final Results of the National Constituent Assembly Elections | language = Arabic | url = http://www.isie.tn/Ar/image.php?id=722 | year = 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Lynch |first=Marc |date=June 29, 2011 |title=Tunisia's New al-Nahda |url=http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/29/tunisias_new_al_nahda |journal=[[Foreign Policy]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Bay |first=Austin |date=2011-11-30 |title=Tunisia and its Islamists: The Revolution, Phase Two |url=http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/11/30/tunisia_and_its_islamists_the_revolution_phase_two_112228.html |work=[[RealClearPolitics]] |accessdate=2012-03-22}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Totten |first=Michael |date=March 21, 2012 |title=No to America and No to Radical Islam |url=http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/no-america-and-no-radical-islam |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120324121609/http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/blog/michael-j-totten/no-america-and-no-radical-islam |archive-date=2012-03-24 |accessdate=2012-03-22}}</ref> ====Pakistan==== Early in the history of the state of [[Pakistan]] (March 12, 1949), a parliamentary resolution (the [[Objectives Resolution]]) was adopted stating the objectives on which the future constitution of the country was to be based. It contained the basic principles of both Islam and Western Democracy, in accordance with the [[Two nation theory|vision]] of the founders of the [[Pakistan Movement]] (Muhammad Iqbal, [[Muhammad Ali Jinnah]], [[Liaquat Ali Khan]]).<ref>"[http://therepublicofrumi.com/archives/liaquat19490309.html Objectives Resolution, Republic of Rumi] {{Dead link|date=March 2013}}</ref> proclaiming:.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://historypak.com/objectives-resolution-1949/ |title=Objectives Resolution (1949) |website=HistoryPak |accessdate=2015-01-15}}</ref> It proclaimed: {{Quote|[[Sovereignty]] belongs to [[Allah]] alone but He has delegated it to the State of Pakistan through its people for being exercised within the limits prescribed by Him as a sacred trust. * The State shall exercise its powers and authority through the elected representatives of the people. * The principles of democracy, freedom, equality, tolerance and social justice, as enunciated by Islam, shall be fully observed. * Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings of Islam as set out in the Quran and Sunnah. * Provision shall be made for the religious minorities to freely profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures.}} This resolution was included in the 1956 constitution as preamble and in 1985<ref>(Revival of Constitution of 1973 Order, 1985 (President's Order No. 14 of 1985))</ref> it was inserted in the constitution itself as Article 2 and Schedule item 53<ref>(with effect from March 2, 1985)</ref> (but with the word "freely" in ''Provision shall be made for the religious minorities to freely profess and practice their religions and develop their cultures'', removed.<ref name=OR-253>{{cite web |title=Annex 731 The Objectives Resolution [Article 2(A)] |url=http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/annex.html |website=pakistan.org |accessdate=2015-01-16}}</ref>). The resolution was inserted again in the constitution in 2010,<ref>(Eighteenth Amendment) Act, 2010, Section 99 (with effect from April 19, 2010)</ref> with the word "freely" reinstated.<ref name=OR-253/> However, Islamisation has proceeded slowly in Pakistan, and Islamists and Islamic parties and activists have expressed frustration that sharia law has not yet been fully implemented. ====Iran==== =====Theory===== The idea and concept of Islamic democracy has been accepted by many Iranian clerics, scholars and intellectuals.<ref >{{cite news |date=August 10, 2002 |title=President Says Democracy Conforms With Religion in Iran |url=http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=6426&sec=59&con=33 |newspaper=Tehran Times |via=WorldWide Religious News |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070308230836/http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=6426&sec=59&con=33 |archive-date=2007-03-08}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.khatami.ir/|title=" Official Website of Sayyid Mohammad Khatami " www.khatami.ir|publisher=|accessdate=2015-05-04}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.drsoroush.com|title=AbdolKarim Soroush:: عبدالکريم سروش|publisher=|accessdate=2014-11-03}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.leader.ir/langs/EN/index.php?p=news&id=3447 |title=News |website=The Office of the Supreme Leader, Sayyid Ali Khamenei] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120310170922/http://www.leader.ir/langs/EN/index.php?p=news&id=3447 |archive-date=2012-03-10}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.khamenei.ir/EN/News/detail.jsp?id=20031220A |title=Participation in Majlis Elections, Religious and Logical Duty: Leader |date=December 20, 2003 |website=Institute for Preserving and Publishing Works by Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenie |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070927225743/http://www.khamenei.ir/EN/News/detail.jsp?id=20031220A |archive-date=2007-09-27}}</ref> The most notable of those who have accepted the theory of Islamic democracy is probably Iran's Leader, Ayatollah [[Ali Khamenei]], who mentions Islamic democracy as "Mardomsalarie Dini" in his speeches. There are also other Iranian scholars who oppose or at least criticise the concept of Islamic democracy. Among the most popular of them are Ayatollah [[Naser Makarem Shirazi]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.makaremshirazi.org/|title=پایگاه اطلاع رسانی دفتر مرجع عالیقدر حضرت آیت الله العظمی مکارم شیرازی|publisher=|accessdate=2015-05-04}}</ref> who have written: "If not referring to the people votes would result in accusations of tyranny then it is allowed to accept people vote as a secondary commandment."<ref>انوار الفقاهه- كتاب البيع - ج 1 ص 516</ref> Also [[Mohammad-Taqi Mesbah-Yazdi]] has more or less the same viewpoint. On the other hand, clergy like [[Hasan Yousefi Eshkevari]] believe that: "The obligatory religious commandments in public domain not necessarily imply recognition of religious state. These obligations can be interpreted as the power of Muslims' religious conscience and applying that through civil society".<ref>[http://www.ibtauris.com/ibtauris/display.asp?ISB=1845111346&TAG=&CID=] {{Dead link|date=March 2013}}</ref> These clergies strictly reject the concept of Islamic state regardless of being democratic or not. They also believe no relationship between Islam and democracy at all, opposing the interpretation of clergy like Ayatollah Makarim al-Shirazi from Islamic state. But they do not mention how legal laws as an example can not be implemented using civil societies and how to administer a country relying on conscience only. =====Practice===== Some Iranians, including [[Mohammad Khatami]], categorize the [[Islamic republic]] of Iran as a kind of religious democracy.<ref>{{cite news |date= |title=Envoy: Religious democracy materialized by Islamic Revolution |url=http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0702089736162511.htm |newspaper=Irna |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070929090437/http://www2.irna.com/en/news/view/line-17/0702089736162511.htm |archive-date=2007-09-29}}</ref> They maintain that Ayatollah Khomeini held the same view as well and that's why he strongly chose "Jomhoorie Eslami" (Islamic Republic) over "Hokoomate Eslami" (Islamic State). Others maintain that not only is the Islamic Republic of Iran undemocratic (see [[Politics of Iran]]) but that Khomeini himself opposed the principle of democracy in his book ''[[Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist|Hokumat-e Islami: Wilayat al-Faqih]]'', where he denied the need for any legislative body saying, "no one has the right to legislate ... except ... the Divine Legislator", and during the Islamic Revolution, when he told Iranians, "Do not use this term, 'democratic.' That is the Western style."<ref>Bakhash, Shaul, ''The Reign of the Ayatollahs'', p.73</ref> Although it is in contrast with his commandment to [[Mehdi Bazargan]]. It is a subject of lively debate among pro-Islamic Iranian [[intelligentsia]]. Also they maintain that Iran's sharia courts, the [[Islamic Revolutionary Court]], [[Blasphemy law in Iran|blasphemy laws of the Islamic Republic of Iran]], and the [[Mutaween]] (religious police) violate the principles of democratic governance.<ref>{{cite news |date=June 12, 2004 |title=Iranian President Khatami Clashes with Reformist Students at Tehran University |url=http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=401 |work=MEMRI TV |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050209040406/http://www.memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=401 |archive-date=2005-02-09}}</ref> However, it should be understood that when a democracy is accepted to be Islamic by people, the law of Islam becomes the democratically ratified law of that country. Iranians have ratified the constitution in which the principle rules are explicitly mentioned as the rules of Islam to which other rules should conform.Ayatollah khomeini fervently believed that principles of democracy can't provide the targeted justice of Islam in the Sharia and Islamic thoughts.(Mohaghegh.Behnam 2014) This contrast of view between the two Iranian head leaders of this Islamic country,as above mentioned about Khatami's and Khomeini's views have provisionally been being a case of disaffiliation of nearly half a country in most probable political coincidence,so the people cognizant of this heterogeneous political belief shall not be affiliated by newly formed views of democratic principles.(Mohaghegh,Behnam 2014) ==Indices of democracy in Muslim countries== There are several non-governmental organizations that publish and maintain [[List of freedom indices|indices of freedom]] in the world, according to their own various definitions of the term, and rank [[Free country (politics)|countries as being free]], partly free, or unfree using various measures of freedom, including [[civil and political rights|political rights]], [[Economic freedom|economic rights]], [[freedom of the press]] and [[civil liberties]]. The following lists [[List of Muslim-majority countries|Muslim-majority countries]] and shows the scores given by two frequently used indices: [[Freedom in the World]] (2013) by the US-based [[Freedom House]] and the 2012 [[Democracy Index]] by the [[Economist Intelligence Unit]]. These indices are frequently used in Western media, but have attracted some [[Freedom House#Criticism|criticism]] and may not reflect recent changes. As of 2012, Indonesia is the only Muslim-majority nation acknowledged as fully democratic by both Freedom House and [[The Economist|Economist]] democracy indexes. :'''Key:''' '''*''' - Electoral democracies '''‡''' - Disputed territory (according to Freedom House) {| class="sortable wikitable" |- ! Location ! Democracy Index Score ! Democracy Index Rank ! Democracy Index Category ! Freedom in the World Status ! Type of government ! Religion and State |- | [[Afghanistan]] || 2.48 || 152 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Islamic republic]], [[presidential system]] || [[Islamic state]] |- | [[Algeria]] || 3.83 || 118 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Azerbaijan]] || 3.15 || 139 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Bahrain]] || 2.53 || 150 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Constitutional monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Bangladesh]] || 5.86 || 84 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Brunei]] || - || - || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Absolute monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Burkina Faso]] || 3.52 || 127 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Partly free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Chad]] || 1.62 || 165 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | *[[Comoros]] || 3.52 || 127 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Partly free || [[Presidential system]], [[Federal republic]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Djibouti]] || 2.74 || 147 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Egypt]] || 4.56 || 109 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Semi-presidential system]] appointed by military || [[State religion]] |- | [[Guinea]] || 2.79 || 146 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Partly free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | *[[Indonesia]] || 6.76 || 53 || Flawed democracy || Free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Iran]] || 1.98 || 158 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Islamic republic]], [[Presidential system]], [[Theocracy]] || [[Islamic state]] |- | [[Iraq]] || 4.10 || 113 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Not free || [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[State religion]] |- |[[Jordan]] || 3.76 || 121 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Not free || [[Constitutional monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Kazakhstan]] || 2.95 || 143 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Kosovo]] || -|| - || - || Partly free || || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Kuwait]] || 3.78 || 119 || [[Hybrid regime]] || Partly free || [[Constitutional monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Kyrgyzstan]] || 4.69 || 106 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Lebanon]] || 5.05 || 99 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Confessionalism (politics)|Confessionalist]] [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[Secular state]] |- | *[[Libya]] || 5.15 || 95 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Malaysia]] || 6.41 || 64 || Flawed democracy || Partly free || [[Constitutional monarchy]], [[Parliamentary system|parliamentary democracy]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Maldives]] || - || - || - || Partly free || || [[State religion]] |- | [[Mali]] || 5.12 || 97 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Not free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- |[[Mauritania]] || 4.17 || 110 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Not free || [[Islamic republic]], [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Islamic state]] |- | [[Morocco]] || 4.07 || 115 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Constitutional monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Niger]] || 4.16 || 111 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Nigeria]] || 3.77 || 120 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Partly free || [[Federalism]], [[presidential system]] || [[Secular state]], [[Islamic state]] (only in the [[northern Nigeria]]n states) |- | ‡[[Northern Cyprus]] ([[Cyprus]]) || - || - || - || Free || || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Oman]] || 3.26 || 135 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Absolute monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Pakistan]] || 4.57 || 108 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Federalism]], [[parliamentary republic]] || [[Islamic state]] |- | ‡[[State of Palestine|Palestine]] ([[Israeli-occupied territories|occupied by Israel]])|| 4.80 || 103 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Not free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] (in [[West Bank]]), de facto [[Islamic state]] (in [[Gaza Strip]]) |- | [[Qatar]] || 3.18 || 138 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Absolute monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Saudi Arabia]] || 1.71 || 163 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || Islamic [[absolute monarchy]] || [[Islamic state]] |- | *[[Senegal]] || 6.09 || 74 || Flawed democracy || Free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | *[[Sierra Leone]] || 4.71 || 104 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Somalia]] || || || || Not free || [[Federalism]], [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[State religion]] |- | ‡[[Somaliland]] (Somalia) || || || || Partly free || || |- | [[Sudan]] || 2.38 || 154 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Federalism]], [[presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] (de jure), [[Islamic state]] (de facto) |- | [[Syria]] || 1.63 || 164 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[Tajikistan]] || 2.51 || 151 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[The Gambia]] || 3.31 || 134 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | *[[Tunisia]] || 5.67 || 90 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Semi-presidential system]] || [[State religion]] |- | *[[Turkey]] || 5.76 || 88 || [[Illiberal democracy]] || Partly free || [[Parliamentary republic]] || [[Secular state]]<ref>{{cite web|url=https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_Turkey|title=Constitution of the Republic of Turkey|publisher=}}</ref><ref>https://global.tbmm.gov.tr/docs/constitution_en.pdf</ref> |- | [[Turkmenistan]] || 1.72 || 161 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]], [[single-party state]] || [[Secular state]] |- | [[United Arab Emirates]] || 2.58 || 149 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Federalism]], [[Constitutional monarchy]] || [[State religion]] |- | [[Uzbekistan]] || 1.72 || 161 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Secular state]] |- | ‡[[Western Sahara]] (controlled by Morocco) || - || - || - || Not free || || - |- | [[Yemen]] || 3.12 || 140 || [[Authoritarianism|Authoritarian regime]] || Not free || [[Presidential system]] || [[Islamic state]] |} ==See also== * [[Institute on Religion and Democracy]] * [[Dialogue Among Civilizations]] * ''[[The Clash of Civilizations]]'' * [[Christian democracy]] * [[Freedom deficit]] * [[Islamic ethics]] * [[Islamic revival]] * [[Islamism]] ==References== {{Reflist|30em}} ==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 * Khatab, Sayed & G.Bouma, Democracy in Islam, Routledge 2007 ==External links== * [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1475928 Liberal Democracy and Political Islam: The Search for Common Ground] * [http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/islamic/democracy.htm Islam and Democracy: Perceptions and Misperceptions] by Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq * [http://www.isn.ethz.ch/isn/Current-Affairs/Security-Watch/Detail/?ots591=4888CAA0-B3DB-1461-98B9-E20E7B9C13D4&lng=en&id=97445 Democracy and the Muslim World] * [http://www.beliefnet.com/story/125/story_12584_1.html Islamic Democracies (article)] * [http://www.ccd21.org/conferences/wwconf_transript2.htm Preview of the Seoul Conference on The Community of Democracies: Challenges and Threats to Democracy] * Marina Ottoway, et al., ''[http://www.carnegieendowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1086&zoom_highlight=Democratic+Mirage+in+the+Middle+East Democratic Mirage in the Middle East]'' Carnegie Endowment for Ethics and International Peace, Policy Brief 20, (October 20, 2002). * [http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0503/0503afterjihad.htm The Muslim's world future is freedom] Book review, with some controversial content. * [http://www.watsoninstitute.org/bjwa/archive/9.2/Iran/Schmid.pdf Expect the Unexpected: A Religious Democracy in Iran] * [http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/english/200108/09/eng20010809_76891.html Iranian President Mohammad Khatami Vows to Establish Religious Democracy in Iran] * [http://www.csidonline.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=104&Itemid=71 Recent Elections and the Future of Religious Democracy in Iran] * [http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?no=331207&rel_no=1 Democracy Lacking in Muslim World] {{Islamism}} {{Political ideologies}} {{Relpolnav}} {{DEFAULTSORT:Islamic democracy}} [[Category:Islamic democracy| ]] [[Category:Sharia]] [[Category:Religion and politics]]'