An International Journal

Transcription

1 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 52 An International Journal J. Hum. Islam 1(1), 52-59, 2011 HATAM Publishers Journal of Humanity & Islam Journal homepage: Book Review Essay The West and Islam: Western Liberal Democracy versus the System of Shura, Mishal Fahm Al-Sulami New York: Routledge Curzon, 2003, pp. xii (288 pages) hb, ISBN: 13: Tauseef Ahmad Parray* Department of Islamic Studies, Aligarh Muslim University (AMU), India. *Corresponding author, tahirtauseefamu@gmail.com ARTICLE INFORMATION Article history Received 26 February 2011 Revised 15 April 2011 Accepted 20 April 2011 Available online 30 April 2011 Keywords Western liberal democracy, Shura, Hasan al-turabi, West, Islam, Al-Nasiha, Sudan ABSTRACT This book analyzes the relationship between Western and Islamic political ideas and focuses on the similarities and differences between Western liberal democracy and Shura often seen as the Islamic counterpart to Western democracy. Referencing the views of the Sudanese Islamist leader Hasan al-turabi, its focus is primarily on comparing the main elements of liberal democracies in the West with their counterparts in the Shura system. The book looks at the historical development of both democratic and Shura ideas and institutions from their inception to modern times, explores the definitions and practices of democracy and Shura; and identifies the main elements of each system. One of the main conclusions is that Shura like the concept of democracy is a contested, with there being no universally accepted definition. Shura has thus acquired at least two different interpretations throughout Islamic history: as a system of government, the second as al-nasiha (advice) HATAM Publishers. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The West and Islam: Western Liberal Democracy versus the System of Shura was originally a doctoral thesis submitted to University of Exeter, England, in 2002 under the title Comparing Western Liberal Democracy and the System of Shura in Islam: A Comparative Study, by Mishal Fahm Al- Sulami. 1 This book offers an in-depth analysis of the relationship between liberal democracies in the West and the Shura system of Islam. Its primary focus is to compare the main elements of liberal democracies in the West with their counterparts in the Shura system, with particular reference to the views of Dr. Hassan Abd Allah al-turabi. 2 Hasan al-turabi as the Islamist thinker here as a choice is significant, for the reason that the concept of Shura has played a central role in al-turabi s political thinking, and his political activity in Sudan has required him to develop material proposals about how Shura should be implemented. Regarding this choice, al-sulami, in the conclusion, writes: It must be pointed out that the case of Sudan, particularly the interpretation of Shura according to al- Turabi, was taken as an example to aid understanding of how shore ideas and institutions should work in modern times (p.199). The comparison with al-turabi s Shura-based political system has to be founded in a

2 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 53 proper understanding of the dimensions and complexities of Western democracy, rather than on a perception that liberal democracy constitutes an undifferentiated and uncontested whole since both terms Shura in Islamic heritage and democracy in Western literature are essentially contested concepts a borrowed term, which originally has been used, during 1970s, by W. B. Gallie 3 for describing democracy the book looks at the historical development of democratic and Shura ideas and institutions from their inception to modern times; explore[s] the definitions and practices of democracy and Shura and identifies the main elements of both these systems (see p.1). The book analyses specifically the relationship between Western liberal democracy and the system of Shura in Islam, by making a comparison of the main elements and mechanisms of Western liberal democracy and their counterparts in al-turabi s interpretation of Shura. In the case of Shura the present literature does not accurately distinguish between its different interpretations and deals with it, most of the time, according to just one of its interpretations, al-nasiha (the giving of advice). Thus, this book explores the two branches of Shura: Shura as a system of government and Shura as al-nasiha (see pp. viii, 198). In addition to explaining the main elements of each system in detail, it highlights points of division and similarity between the two systems, not only at the level of the main ideas but also at the level of actual institutions. Al-Sulami writes that the present literature has suffered from a serious lack of analysis and in-depth discussion with regard to the topic of democracy and Shura. Very often the literature (particularly that written in English) that examines the topic of Islam ( Shura as it is called in Arabic literature) versus democracy has looked at the concept of Shura in brief. While the literature (particularly that written in Arabic) that examines the concept of Shura is either very descriptive or not comprehensive, focusing on its development in a particular period of Islamic history. Although much literature has been produced, particularly from 1990s on the Islam-democracy compatibility theme, no such work has compared the two concepts/institutions in such a way. Therefore, there is not much exaggeration in the author`s argument that there is no work that addresses the topic of democracy and Shura comprehensively; this book intends to help fill this gap (p. viii). But it is equally true that almost every book on this theme, discusses Shura with relation to democracy (among other operational key concepts of democracy in Islam, including Khilafah, Ijma and Ijtihad, and values and positive features like justice freedom, equality, human rights, public welfare, etc.). The book divided into two parts consists of 6 chapters (3 chapters each), preceded (among others) by Foreword (pp. vi-vii, by Professor Tim Niblock, Director, The Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter), Preface (p. viii), Introduction (pp.1-16); and followed by Conclusion (pp ). In the Foreword, Prof. Tim Niblock argues that the conclusions of the book, reinforce the contention that the concept of Shura can be used to underpin key liberal democratic ideas rather than to destroy them creating an Islamic justification which should help to give them more ready acceptance in the Islamic world. The central dilemma, for Niblock, in the promotion of democracy in Islamic countries, therefore, is one of practical politics and not of religious-based incompatibility (see pp.vi-vii). 2. The Significance, Objective, and Scope of the book Significance: The significance of the book lies in the fresh contributions made to the current literature on the Islam-democracy theme. Firstly, this book can serve as a guide for those (teachers, researchers, and students alike) who are interested in understanding the concept of Shura and how the Shura system worked throughout Islamic history and how it should work, in al-turabi s view, in modern times. Since Shura is a contested concept, the author examines it at both the theoretical as well as practical levels. Close examination of the concept of Shura reveals that the term has had two branches through Islamic history: a system of government and al-nasiha (advice), one of the main arguments of the book (see, among others, pp. viii, and 198). Secondly, this is one of the much better book to compare the main elements of liberal democracies in the West with their counterparts in al-turabi s interpretation of Shura. In addition to explaining the main elements of each system in detail, the book makes the reader aware of the

3 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 54 similarities and differences between the two systems, not only at the level of the main ideas, but also at the level of actual institutions. Thirdly, this book presents Shura according to al-turabi as a comprehensive and coherent system of government. Shura is thus presented, by al-turabi, as a system of government consisting of institutions that cover almost all matters related to al- amr al- aam (public affairs), from electing the head of state to explaining how interest groups and local governments should function. Al-Turabi establishes his arguments to support these institutions on the basis of religion and the experience of early Islamic government. Although it will be author`s exaggeration to argue that the main elements and institutions of Shura as a system of government have not been explained in detail by the leaders of Islamic movements in modern times, in a sense, because, a survey of the literature reveals that he is not the only Muslim who has contributed towards reconciling the issue of Islam and democracy compatibility on the basis of re-interpretation of Shura. Majority of the scholars and writers Muslims as well as non-muslims of present era, have and are sincerely writing on this theme. Some of the examples of this (among Muslims) are Rashid al-ghanouchi, M A Muqtedar Khan, Sadek Jawad Sulaiman, Louay Safi, Abdul Karim Saroush, Dr. Radwan Masmoudi, and among non-muslims are John L. Esposito, James Piscatori, John O Voll, etc. It may be argued that Shura, along with other political concepts, such as Khilafah, Ijma, and Ijtihad are regarded as the operational concepts of Islamic democracy or democracy in Islam. The positive features and notions of democracy, like freedom, justice, equality, human rights, rule of law, public welfare, tolerance, etc, are also embedded in the primary sources of Islam (holy Qur`an and sunnah of Prophet) as well. Al-Sulami also mentions this assumption that the identity of Islamic tradition is inherently democratic, not only due to the concept of Shura, but also in the light of the concepts of ijtihad (independent judgment) and ijma (consensus), (see p. 6), basing his argument on the views of John L. Esposito and James Piscatori ( Democratization and Islam, Middle East Journal, 45: 3, 1991, , esp., p. 434). Here, it may point out that Islam is a religion, a civilization, a way of life, and is much wider than democracy (which is just a concept, a form of government and a philosophy). There are various Islamic political concepts and teachings that produce a system compatible with the most advanced democracy. And that democracy, in the present times, has various variants, kinds, and varieties, is also to be mentioned. Therefore, various forms of democracy can suite to varying Muslim countries. There are pluralistic democracies in Bangladesh and Malaysia, a secular democracy in Turkey, and an Islamic state in Iran (a sort of theo-democracy), i.e., there are diverse forms of democracy in various Muslim countries. There can be one democratic system in Indonesia, another in Malaysia, third in Pakistan, fourth in Egypt, etc. They are diverse but all are Islamic and compatible with democracy. Regarding the literature, for example, the works produced from , that is, before the publication of the book under review are by Esposito and Voll, Charles Kurzman, Eugene Cotran,& Adel Omar Sherif, Ali Reza Abootalebi, Forough Jahanbakhsh, Saad Eddin Ibrahim, to mention a few of them only. 4 So to argue such things seem to be false. It is equally true that things have changed a lot after Much literature has been produced on this theme. About works published in 2003, for example, mention may be made of Larry Diamond et.al, Abidullah Jan, and Frederic Volpi; and after 2003 mention may be made of the books both discussing the theme of Islam-democracy discourse directly and those discussing it in relation with Muslim societies, and European countries such as: Khaled Abou El Fadl, Jocelyne Cesari, M.A. Muqtedar Khan, Mahmoud Ismaeilian, Sayed Khatab and Gary D. Bouma, Asef Bayat, Zoya Hasan, Bora Kanra, Nader Hashemi, and Shiping Hua. 5 Finally, the book enriches the discussion and debate on the topic of Shura and democracy by introducing new terminologies. These are discussed in detail in the course of comparing the main elements of each system in Part II. Specifically, the elements discussed are political trends versus political parties in liberal democracies, a temporary constitutional court, testing the constitutionality of new laws and legislation versus a special full-time constitutional court in liberal democracies, ijma (consensus) as a procedure of decision-making in Shura versus a simple majority rule in liberal democracies, al-nasiha (advice) as the way competitive elections function in Shura versus bottom-

4 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 55 up and top-down in Western liberal democracies, and the al-nasiha (advice) approach as the way in which interest groups and governments interact in Shura versus the pluralist and corporatist approaches in Western liberal democracies (see p.2). Objective: The book endeavors mainly to answer the question of whether Western liberal democracy and al-turabi s Shura system are compatible. Many sub-questions emerge from this main question, and these questions have been divided into two categories: questions concerning liberal democracies in the West and Shura in Islam with al-turabi s view given emphasis as regards Shura, and questions regarding the comparison between the two systems. In the first category, there are 8 main questions ranging from what does democracy mean? Do liberal democracies take one form or many forms in the West? to what does Shura mean? Does Shura take only one form or can it take more than one form in Islam? What are the main elements of Shura in modern times? In the second category, there are two main questions: Are the main elements and sub-elements and institutions of liberal democracies in the West different from their counterparts in the Shura system, in al-turabi s opinion? How much agreement and disagreement is there between al-turabi s Shura system and Western liberal democracies in terms of these main elements and sub-elements and institutions? (p. 3). Scope: Regarding the scope of the book, it may be said that it is focused on systems of democracy and Shura. With respect to democracy, the experience of liberal democracy in the West is addressed. Western democratic institutions and ideas are analyzed in depth in Western democratic theory. Great efforts have been made, therefore, to examine the most common institutions in Western constitutions, as Western liberal democracies do not have a single model. For example, the executive power may follow one of three models: the British, i.e., parliamentarianism (other countries following this model are Canada, Australia and New Zealand); the American, a model of pure presidentialism; and the European, i.e., European presidentialism. The European model may be subdivided into strong presidentialism (e.g., France, Finland and Portugal) and weak presidentialism (e.g., Italy, Austria and Greece). (These models have been examined in detail in Chapter 5). It is these three models, which represent, generally speaking, the main forms of democracy in the West that is focused on in the book. Regarding the Shura, the book investigates and analyses it according to the perception of Sunni Muslims. It looks at the development of different interpretations of Shura throughout Islamic history within the framework of Sunni Islamic ideas. As an example to aid understanding of the concept of Shura in modern times, the case of Sudan has been chosen by the author, particularly the interpretation taken by al-turabi. This has been done, according to al-sulami, for two reasons: First, Sudan is among the very few Arab countries that name Shura in their constitutions as the system of government; and second, the concept of Shura has focused attention on al-turabi, which is due to his reinterpretation and modernizing of Shura from the fundamental Islamic political sources: the Qur an, the Prophet s model and the experience of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. He has introduced a new model of Shura borrowing many ideas and institutions from the experience of liberal democracies in the West to cope with Muslim political needs in modern times under the framework of Shari ah. Many of al-turabi s ideas and thoughts on Shura were given expression in the constitution of Sudan of 1998 (see p.4). A central question is whether liberal democracies in the West are compatible with al-turabi s Shura system. And attempting to answer this question requires first of all a thorough analysis and investigation of the present literature dealing with it. The literature review reveals some important points, and the most important of them are that there are two approaches in terms of how academic discussion and debates tackle the comparison between the system of governance in the West (democracy) and its counterpart in Islam (Shura), and according to this approach, democracy is the system of government in the West, while Islam is the term utilized in this context to mean a system of governance in Islam, that is, in this sense, Islam is defined as a religion and state (din wa dawlah). In the second approach, the comparison is made between liberal democracies as a system of governance in the West and the Islamic political order (specifically the Shura system) as a system of government in Islam. It is argued that the state is only one aspect of Islam, that the Qur an offers only

5 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 56 very general guidelines with regard to Muslim public affairs (Islamic politics), and the Qur an and the Prophet did not lay down any specific instructions or certain rules about the political system; these guidelines are general and they can be interpreted according to Muslims circumstances in any given period. This approach is found in much of the Arabic literature. In this book, al-sulami follows the second approach, because it is logical to compare system with system rather than system with religion. Islam is a religion and liberal democracies are a system of governance. Therefore, it is not fair to compare Islam, which is a comprehensive way of life dealing with all aspects of Muslim living, with liberal democracies in the West, which are merely a system of governance. It is more logical to compare religion with religion Islam with Christianity or Judaism and the system of government in the West with its counterpart in Islam liberal democracies with Shura. This book thus uses the term Shura as a system of governance in Islam to compare it with its counterpart in the West, liberal democracies. The second important point the existing literature reveals is that there are two different perceptions with regard to the question of the compatibility of liberal democracies in the West with the Shura system in Islam. The first perception is that Islamic tradition and its basic tenets are incompatible with the basic premises of liberal democracies in the West. There are both opposers and supporters on this theme (see p.5). The supporters, both Muslim and non-muslim scholars/ writers have shown how the seeds of democratic premises were already present in Islamic heritage, citing some democratic assumptions in Islamic tradition: The practice of Shura, Social justice Zakah (obligatory charity) Saddaqah (voluntary charity), the establishment of Bayt al-mal (the treasury), the electoral process, the concept of al-bai ah (pledge of allegiance), and the right of the people to criticize an unjust ruler, stemming from the doctrine of al- Amr bil-ma ruf wa al-nahi an al-munkar, the duty of the believers to enjoin good and forbid evil (pp. 6-7). The third significant point that the literature revealed is that both Shura in Islamic heritage and democracy in the Western literature are essentially contested concepts. With contested concepts, controversy runs deep and no generally accepted definition has ever been developed. To understand a contested concept, it is important first to define different versions and interpretations of the concept and then to recognize that competing versions and interpretations may be equally valid. Finally, as political theorists suggest, it is perhaps better to treat contested concepts as currently contested. In the case of democracy, a Greek word made up of two root words: demos and kratos: Demos might signify two different things: the people as a whole; or the common people (the mob); Kratos might mean two different things: power or rule, which of course is not similar. Furthermore, conceptually democracy can be discussed through two different approaches: substantial (ideals and values) and procedural (institutions of government). And since the main focus of this study is to compare the chief elements of liberal democracies with their counterparts in the Shura system, it examines and analyzes democracy primarily in terms of institutions of government (operational processes and values of democratic government) rather than in terms of ideals and values. In the case of Shura, the concept could have at least two complementary interpretations in the Arabic and Islamic heritage: (1) a system of government, which must be based on the free will of the Muslims masses, and (2) al-nasiha (advice), the ruler asking other people, particularly religious leaders, tribal leaders or influential people, merely for advice. Part I, Historical Background (pp.17-18), consists of three chapters, viz: I. The Evolution of Democracy (pp ). This chapter argues that democracy is an essentially contested concept, having no single precise and agreed meaning. Democracy has had very different connotations in its long history and there is an entirely different version of the concept in modern times from that in ancient Greece, for example. This chapter takes a historical perspective on democracy, analyzing the advances that occurred in democratic ideas and institutions in seven periods: ancient Middle East, ancient Greece, and Italian city-republics, the Levelers, the American Revolution, the French Revolution and post-french Revolution. Each period is examined in turn. It states that the history of democratic institutions actually begins not in ancient Greece but in the ancient Middle East ; arguing that the aim of this section is to go beyond the democratic experience of Athens to explore some democratic political institutions that existed in the ancient Middle East (the ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian cities) prior to the democratic institutions of classical Greece. This section relies heavily on Patricia Springborg, The Origins of Liberal Institutions in the Ancient Middle East (1993), and is taken as an authoritative reference (p. 19).

6 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 57 II. The Eclectic Nature of Shura (pp ). Shura, like democracy, is an essentially contested concept; it does not have a universally accepted definition and it has had very different interpretations in its long history. To understand the concept of Shura requires examining the historical development of its ideas and institutions from their inception through to modern times. Therefore, this chapter examines the theoretical concept of Shura in the Qur an and the Prophet s ahadith (the sayings and traditions of the Prophet Muhammad [pbuh]), analyzing Shura in four historical periods in which advances in its ideas and institutions occurred: pre-islamic Arabia; from the Prophet s period until the period of the Rightly Guided Caliphs; from the Umayyad period until the Ottoman Empire period; and modern times, based on the discourse of moderate Islamist movements and moderate Muslim thinkers. Each period is examined in turn. III. Shura in the Contemporary Period: The Case of Sudan (pp ). This chapter is divided into three main sections: the first explains the Sudanese political and historical context and the second looks at the evolution of the Ikhwan bloc and its role in the political environment. The third section analyses the concept of Shura according to al-turabi s perception of it. In the political and historical context of Sudan, there are three distinctive features that have played an influential role in shaping political forces in Sudan: (i) the multi-cultural and multi-religious composition of the population; (ii) Sudan is one of the very few Arab states where political parties, whether based on religious tariqahs (orders) or on tribal groupings or even on an ideological concept, have been permitted to organize over prolonged periods; and (iii) traditionalist sectarian parties (the Ummah and the Khatmiyyah) have wielded social influence, and this has changed the character of Sudanese political parties since independence. This section examines, broadly, the political environment of Sudan in the pre-independence and post-independence eras (p. 61). Part II, Comparison of Western Liberal Democracies and al-turabi s Shura System (pp.79-80), also comprises of 3 chapters, viz: IV. The Foundations of Western Liberal Democracy and al-turabi s Shura System (pp ). This chapter is divided into two main sections: the first looks at the legislative reference foundation of Western Liberal democracy and al-turabi`s Shura system and the second considers constitutional fundamentals. Regarding the Western liberal democracy, he argues that the Christianity played a very large role in shaping the political tradition of the West. This section examines the place of the state in Christianity and looks at the relationship between the state and the church, particularly from the conversion of the Emperor Constantine (Constantine, the Great, who ruled from 312 to 337 AD) to Christianity up to modern times. The conversion of the Emperor Constantine to Christianity in the fourth century was one of the most important turning points in the history of Europe. Constantine recognized Christianity as the official religion of the Empire. Unlike other religions, e.g., Islam, Christianity initially insisted on maintaining a sharp distinction between the things belonging to Caesar and the things belonging to God. The actual phrase Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar s, and unto God the things that are God s has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship between Christianity and secular authority. In contrast, Islam was considered as a comprehensive phenomenon, making no distinction between sacred and secular, it was religion and state (din wa dawlah) (see p.81). In the second part it discusses constitutional fundamentals. V. Political System Divisions (pp ). This chapter is divided into three sections: division of powers, devolved power and peaceful transfer of power. Each is examined from the standpoint of Western liberal democracy and al-turabi s Shura system. Two subjects are considered here in turn: the historical development of constitutional government theories and the functions of governmental branches. Regarding the Western liberal democracy, al-sulami writes that the problem of ensuring that the power of government is exercised properly has been a matter of debate for several centuries and three main constitutional theories, at least, have emerged in the attempt to find a solution to this problem. These three theories, in order of chronological development, are: the theory of mixed government which developed in England, entailing a system of government based on the king, the House of Lords and the House of Commons sharing the power of government; the theory of separation of powers according to which the highest command in a state by the first constitution of it is equally seated in all three of the agencies of the government; and the theory of a balanced constitution (p. 125).

7 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 58 VI. Political Legalization (pp ). This chapter is divided into three sections: political participation, elections and associational autonomy. In each section, the standpoints of Western liberal democracies and al-turabi s Shura system are compared. The concept, modes and intensity of political participation in Western democratic theory and Shura, according to al-turabi s interpretation, are discussed in this chapter. Each concept has been analyzed in turn. Political participation as interaction stresses the notion of sharing in common life and acting on the basis of reciprocity in an attempt to promote the public good. It emphasizes the idea of citizens sharing justice and orienting their actions towards public good, and of public membership (p.158). This is followed by 5 pages Conclusion (pp ), which argues that the study has arrived at four main findings (p.198). The most important of them are: that Shura is a contested concept, having no universally accepted definition; and has acquired at least two different interpretations throughout Islamic history. The first is a system of government, and the second interpretation of Shura is al-nasiha (advice), i.e., the ruler s asking other people, particularly religious leaders, tribal leaders or influential people, merely for advice. In modern times moderate Islamist movements and thinkers have endeavored to develop an Islamic political order, a process in which it could take on board the experience of Shura in the early Islamic period and shape it to cope with modern Muslim political needs. They have found their aspirations in democracy and, therefore, have accepted the equality of the notion of democracy to the Islamic political order. The new Islamic political order can embrace democratic ideas and institutions, but only after they are subjected to reinterpretation and reformulation in the light of Shari ah values and norms (p ). The second and fundamental finding of this study is that the central frame work of al-turabi`s Shura system (as it has emerged at the end of the process) is very close in its essential elements to that of Western liberal democracy. Al-Turabi like other leaders of moderate Islamist movements and moderate Islamist thinkers, has accepted the centrality of the notion of democracy to Shura in modern times. So it is surprising that seven out of eight of the main elements and mechanisms of the Shura system (civil liberty, ijma (consensus), election of the president of the state and members of the Shura council, division of powers, political participation, competitive elections and multi-party or trend system), as identified in the discourse of moderate Islamist movements and prominent Islamist thinkers, are similar to their counterparts in Western liberal democracies) civil liberties, majority rule, elected representatives, separation of powers, political participation, competitive elections, and the political party system and interest groups) (p.199). The third important finding of this book is the basic divergence between al-turabi`s Shura system and Western liberal democracy is the concept of sovereignty (the ultimate source of political power). This may be considered the third main finding of this study, claims al-sulami (p.200). Thus, the point here is that the book has observed the concept of sovereignty n both systems, in Shura and in democracy. There is a substantial difference between the two systems only on one essential element (as per the observations of al-sulami), and that is on the concept of sovereignty (God`s sovereignty in al-turabi`s Shura system, and popular sovereignty in Western liberal democracies). But some scholars, like Maulana Maududi (d.1979) and Prof Khurshid Ahmad (b.1932) of Pakistan, have pointed out some more main/basic differences between Islamic democracy and Western democracy. These main differences are on the basis of concept of Sovereignty, Law, and law making; and in the words of Mawlana Mawdudi, what distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy is that while the latter is based on the concept of Popular Sovereignty the former rests on the principle of Popular Khilafah. In Western democracy the people are sovereign, in Islam Sovereignty vests in God and the people are His Caliphs or representatives. In the later the people make their own laws (Shari ah); in the former they have to follow and obey the laws (Shari ah) given by God through His Prophet. In brief, Western democracy is a kind of absolute authority which exercises its powers in a free and uncontrolled manner where as the Islamic democracy is subservient to the Divine Law and exercises its authority in conformity with the injunctions of God and within the limits prescribed by Him (Italics emphasized). 6

8 The West & Islam- Book Review Essay: P a g e 59 In the support of these arguments of Mawlana Mawdudi, Khurshid Ahmad writes that the coordinal difference between the two is on the basis of concept of sovereignty; he writes: The Islamic State is different from a secular democracy as it is diametrically opposed to the concept of Sovereignty of the people. Allah the Supreme Law-Giver and the Shari ah is the law of the land. Within the framework of the Shari ah, new problems are faced and their solutions worked out. This represents the co-ordinal difference (Italics emphasized). 7 To conclude, The West and Islam: Western Liberal Democracy versus the System of Shura is one of the works that provides a direct and detailed comparison between the two systems of governance i.e., between democracy and Shura as given expression in the concrete political systems which have emerged. This book will prove a reference work for all those interested in understanding the concept of Shura in Islam and will contribute to filling the gap in the present literature and assist academics and theorists in understanding more deeply, on the one hand, the main institutions and mechanisms of Shura in Islam and, on the other, the similarities and differences between institutions and mechanisms in Western liberal democracies and in Shura. Endnotes: 1. Mishal Fahmi al-sulami (born in Makkah, Saudi Arabia) is presently an Assistant Professor of Modern Western Political Thought in the Arts and Humanities Faculty, King Abdulaziz University (KAU) in Saudi Arabia 2. Dr. Hassan 'Abd Allah al-turabi (b. c.1932), commonly called Hassan al-turabi, is a religious and Islamist political leader in Sudan. For details about his biography and philosophy, see Hassan al-turabi, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Turabi (as accessed on ) 3. Democracy is an essentially contested concept, is the actual term used by W. B. Gallie for democracy in his book, Philosophy and the Historical Understanding (London: Chatto and Windus, 1964) p. 158, and here al-sulami uses it, many times, in this book both with democracy and Shura. For example, see pp. viii, 198, &199 (of the book under review). Walter Bryce Gallie ( ) was a British social theorist, political theorist, and philosopher. 4. These works, from (in chronological order), are: John L. Esposito & John O. Voll, Islam and Democracy (1996); Charles Kurzman, Liberal Islam: A Sourcebook (1998); Eugene Cotran, Adel Omar Sherif, Democracy, the rule of law and Islam (1999); Ali Reza Abootalebi, Islam and democracy (2000); Forough Jahanbakhsh, Islam, Democracy and Religious Modernism in Iran, : from Bazargan to Saroush, (2001), Saad Eddin Ibrahim, Egypt, Islam, and Democracy: Critical Essays, With a New Postscript (2002) 5. These works, from (in chronological order), are: Larry Diamond, et.al (Ed), Islam and Democracy in the Middle East (2003); Abid Ullah Jan, The End of Democracy (2003); Frederic Volpi Islam and Democracy: The Failure of Dialogue in Algeria (2003); Khaled Abou El Fadl, Islam and the Challenge of Democracy (2004); Jocelyne Cesari, When Islam and Democracy Meet - Muslims in Europe and in the United States (2004); M.A. Muqtedar Khan (Ed.) Islamic Democratic Discourse: Theory, Debates and Philosophical Perspectives (2006); Mahmoud Ismaeilian, Islam Vs Democracy (2006); Sayed Khatab and Gary D. Bouma, Democracy in Islam (2007); Asef Bayat, Islam and democracy: what is the real question? (2007); Zoya Hasan (Ed.), Democracy in Muslim Societies: The Asian Experience, (2007); Bora Kanra, Islam, democracy and dialogue in Turkey: Deliberating in divided Societies (2009); Nader Hashemi, Islam, Secularism, and Liberal Democracy: Toward a Democratic Theory for Muslim Societies (2009); and Shiping Hua (ed.) Islam and Democratization in Asia (2009) 6. Syed Abu Ala Mawdudi, Islamic Way of Life, (trans) Khurshid Ahmad (Delhi: Markazi Maktaba Islami, 1967), pp Khurshid Ahmad, Islam and Democracy: Some Conceptual and Contemporary Dimensions, in The Muslim World 90: 1&2, 1-21, 2001, pp.14