Democratic Institutions in Some Muslim Majority States and Their Role in Shari'ah Implementation: A Case Study
There appears to be a notion among some Muslims and non-Muslims that violence must be applied in implementing Shari'ah (herein defined as Islam-based governance). Another seemingly extreme view holds that democracy, along with its principles, is un-Islamic and therefore cannot be accommodated i...
| Published in: | The Journal of Rotterdam Islamic and Social Sciences |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
De Gruyter, Versita
2015
|
| In: |
The Journal of Rotterdam Islamic and Social Sciences
|
| Further subjects: | B
Islam
B Kano B Democracy B Institutions B Shari'ah B Muslim |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | There appears to be a notion among some Muslims and non-Muslims that violence must be applied in implementing Shari'ah (herein defined as Islam-based governance). Another seemingly extreme view holds that democracy, along with its principles, is un-Islamic and therefore cannot be accommodated in a Shari'ah governance and vice versa. There also seems to be a tendency among some Muslim politicians to regard democracy as essentially secular and therefore devoid of any contribution it might render to Shari'ah implementation. A governor in one of the northwestern states declared his determination to implement Shari'ah after the inception of the 4th republic in Nigeria, buttressing his stand with a provision from the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. This resulted to a general clamour among other states with a Muslim majority for the implementation of Shari'ah in their states also. Kano state was the second after Zamfara State to do so. This paper looks at how democratic institutions, particularly constitutionalism, are employed to implement Shari'ah and the role of dialogue/legal decisions in avoiding/resolving possible conflicts, taking Kano State as a case study. Laying emphasis on the period 2003-2006, the paper sourced relevant information from some official documents, published and unpublished materials, and personal visits to and discussions with some prominent figures in its attempt to determine the constitutional provisions that justified Shari'ah implementation in Muslim majority states and how the three tiers of government were engaged in the Shari'ah project. The paper discovered that Kano State was able to succeed as well as substantially avoid violence in its effort to implement Shari'ah by adhering strictly to the constitutional provisions and employing the services of other democratic institutions. The judiciary screens and trains Shari'ah judges and ensures that no conflict arises between Shari'ah law and the Nigerian constitution. The legislative codifies the Shari'ah-based laws, while the executive maintains a cordial relationship with these two arms. The paper concludes that democratic bodies can be comfortably used to realize and enhance Shari'ah implementation in Muslim majority states without resorting to violence and fatal confrontations. Democratic institutions can be of great benefit to Shari'ah-based governance in the modern world, despite some fundamental differences between the two. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2199-6172 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The Journal of Rotterdam Islamic and Social Sciences
|