Democracy as a System of Governance

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

(Note: This article introduces the theoretical concept of democracy. The practical corruptions found in democratic systems today fall outside the scope of this discussion.)

At the very mention of democracy, people instinctively recall Iqbāl’s famous couplet:

Jamhooriyyat ek tarz-e-hukūmat hai ke jis mein
Bandōñ ko ginā karte hain, tōlā nahīñ karte

“Democracy is a system of rule in which
people are merely counted, not weighed.”

This criticism has been repeated so often that people have accepted it blindly. In reality, however, there is very little truth in it. It is true that democracy is described as the rule of public representatives, but this does not mean that every institution and every matter of public interest is run by mere head-counting. It is not the case that people are only ‘counted’. In fact, the most distinctive feature of democracy is precisely that people are weighed — positions and responsibilities are assigned on the basis of knowledge, practical skill, and competence.

Thus, in educational institutions, the appointment of teachers and administrators; in courts, the selection of lawyers and judges; in fields of medicine, commerce, economics; in the army and defence services—every domain operates on the basis of merit and expertise.

—

Democracy is Not a Value

It should be understood that democracy is not a value in itself. Education, justice, equality, security, and economic prosperity are values. Democracy is only a means through which these values may be realised—just as the caliphate and monarchy are also means. And just as the caliphate and monarchy have been abused, democracy too can be misused.

—

Non-Concentration of Power

Democracy was conceived as a response to the injustices of monarchical and feudal systems. Democracy, too, can develop the same ailments it was meant to cure. Therefore, from the outset, efforts were made to ensure that power does not concentrate in a single person or single organisational structure. Power is therefore divided among three branches:

1. The Legislature

2. The Executive

3. The Judiciary

In a democratic system, who holds real power is a subtle matter — almost a “hidden secret”. Yet this distribution of authority remains one of democracy’s greatest achievements.

—

Correcting the Weaknesses of Democracy

As mentioned, legislative bodies are elected by the public, and every citizen’s vote carries equal weight. There is no doubt that this is a flaw — the very flaw Iqbāl criticised. But this flaw has never been hidden from the experts of democratic theory. They recognised it fully and sought various ways to mitigate its effects.

Members of the lower house (the House of Commons or National Assembly) are public representatives but not necessarily experts in legislation. There is always a risk that they may pass laws harmful to the nation. To remedy this weakness, another body was created — the upper house, comprising experts from various essential fields: legal scholars, economists, educators, and guardians of the nation’s values and traditions.

The process is as follows:

1. A bill is introduced in the lower house.

2. Its benefits and rationale are presented in detail.

3. Members are given time to study it and consult specialists.

4. It is debated, arguments are presented, and then it is voted upon.

5. If passed, it goes to the upper house.

6. The upper house studies it with expertise and may approve it or send it back with objections.

7. The lower house then reconsiders it in light of these objections.

8. If the lower house passes it again, it returns to the upper house.

9. The upper house may return it twice. The third time, it must approve it.

10. It then receives the signature of the head of state and becomes law.

—

Islam and Democracy

There is one aspect of democracy that conflicts with Islam. If this point is amended, democracy becomes acceptable within an Islamic framework.

The issue is this:
In Islam, legislation (tashrīʿ) belongs exclusively to God.
No person or institution has the authority to legislate independently of the Qurʾān and Sunnah.

Therefore, the lower house must distinguish between:

1. Matters on which the religion has consensus (majmaʿ ʿalayh)

2. Matters that are disputed (mukhtalaf fīh)

In mukhtalaf fīh matters, the lower house may deliberate and choose a preferred view. Likewise, it may issue administrative regulations related to public welfare (maṣāliḥ ʿāmmah).

If the power of the lower house is restricted in this manner, the objectionable features of democracy disappear. For this restriction to be effective:

The judiciary must be fully independent, so no one interferes with it.

Judicial independence ensures that the supremacy of the Qurʾān and Sunnah remains intact — which is the foundation of the Islamic system.

Moreover:

The upper house should include a significant number of ʿulamāʾ, fuqahāʾ, and muḥaddithūn alongside experts from other fields.

If this upper house is named the Shūrā, it constantly reminds people of the Islamic tradition of consultation.

Additionally, public representatives may be required to have basic religious and worldly education — a requirement that already exists indirectly in the West.

—

Summary

In democracy, only the lower house is elected by the people. The remaining institutions of the state lie outside the sphere of public election, and their appointments are made strictly on merit.

Democracy is neither inherently Islamic nor inherently un-Islamic. It is a means, not an end. It can serve noble purposes, just as it can be used for ignoble ones.

—

Disclaimer: This article was translated by AI. Original post: https://t.me/DrAkramNadwi/4779