Debating shura and democracy among British Muslim organizations

Shura as the system of representation of the Muslim’s voice in, typically, the Islamic state is often confronted with the West representation system namely Democracy. Some Islamic scholars believe that Shura is still the best system for Muslims to vote for their need in the state. However, as Islam is not a monolithic doctrine, some other Muslim groups have another alternative view to represent their political opinion to the state by, surprisingly, practicing democracy. In brief, Shura is still placed God instructions as the reference of all decisions which are made in the council. Otherwise, democracy merely stands its policy on the people. Both systems have a long tradition processes to find their recent way in this global age. And the British Muslims have to realize that they live in a developed country like Britain and still have to be Muslim. Giving challenging condition, Hizbut Tahrir, Tablighi Jama’at, and Muslim Council of Britain, three prominent Muslim Organizations in England, have different attitude towards democratic Britain to voice their representation. On the one hand, Hizbut Tahrir strictly rejects the idea of democracy as its goal is to establish the Islamic Caliphate in the world. And on another hand, Tablighi Jama’at tends to stay away from the political issue, including its representation, as the core of this organization is only preaching in a peaceful way. Finally, Muslim Council of Britain as the umbrella of small-medium IJIMS, Indonesian Journal of Islam and Muslim Societies, Volume 1, Number 2, December 2011: 229-252 230 Muslim organizations in England, in fact is involving in the system of British democracy. Shura sebagai sistem perwakilan seringkali diperbandingkan dengan sistem perwakilan Barat, yaitu demokrasi. Beberapa tokoh umat Islam percaya bahwa shura masih merupakan sistem perwakilan yang terbaik untuk menyuarakan keinginan umat Islam terhadap negara. Namun demikian, karena Islam bukan merupakan doktrin yang kaku, ada beberapa kelompok Muslim lain yang memiliki pandangan berbeda di dalam mengemukakan aspirasi politiknya terhadap negara, yang justru menggunakan sistem demokrasi. Secara singkat, sistem shura masih menempatkan ajaran-ajaran Tuhan sebagai acuan untuk memutuskan segala persoalan dalam dewan. Sedangkan demokrasi membuat kebijakan semata-mata berdasarkan pada suara manusia. Kedua sistem ini memiliki proses tradisional yang panjang untuk mencapai bentuknya seperti sekarang ini. Sementara itu, Muslim Inggris harus menyadari bahwa mereka hidup di negara maju dan harus tetap ber-Islam. Menghadapi kondisi yang menantang ini, tiga organisasi Islam terkemuka di Inggris seperti Hizbut Tahrir, Tablighi Jama’ah, dan Muslim Council of Britain memiliki sikap berbeda untuk menyatakan suara mereka terhadap pemerintah Inggris yang demokratis. Satu sisi, Hizbut Tahrir dengan keras menolak ide demokrasi dikarenakan cita-cita mereka adalah mendirikan kekhalifahan Islam di dunia. Sementara di sisi yang lain, Tablighi Jama’ah cenderung menghindari isu politik, termasuk keterwakilan mereka. Terakhir, Muslim Council of Britain yang merupakan payung bagi organisasi-organisasi Islam kecil-menengah di Inggris pada kenyataannya ikut serta di dalam sistem demokrasi Inggris.


Introduction
As a set of complete guidance of life, Islam has ruled the personal and social attitude of its followers. This regulation was ultimately derived from the basic sources of instruction of Muslims, namely the Quran (the sacred texts of the Divine) and hadith (statements and behaviors of the Prophet). Nevertheless, as Islam is not monolithic, these sources need a proper interpretation of the Muslim scholars to be rightly applicable through the times. Included in this arrangement is on the authority and representation of the Muslim's voice as an individual and social member in the state. Though still as a contested system, some Muslim scholars believe that Shura (consultation) has been the best system to represent and to solve the Muslim's affairs. Shura is a representative council in Islamic political system where the members in it discuss all Muslim's affairs such as war, peace, trading, social welfare, and so forth under God instructions. 1 Shura system is often opposed to the democracy in the West as a non-Islamic representation system.
In general, among other theories, democracy is a system of repre- other hand, they realize that the democratic political system in the West is non-Islamic. This situation also takes place in Muslims in Britain.
As they have a significant numbers in the country, British Muslims gather in several organizations such as Hizbut Tahrir, Tablighi Jama'at, and Muslim Council of Britain. Generally, these organizations unite their members based on their different ideologies within democratic Britain.
Hizbut Tahrir is a radical transnational organization whose aim is to establish an Islamic empire throughout the world, Tablighi Jama'at is a traditional transnational movement organization to proselytize peaceful Islam, and Muslim Council of Britain is an umbrella organization for huge numbers of Islamic local organizations in Britain.
This essay intends to discuss the understanding of the two contested political system, Shura and democracy, and their development and practice until this moment. It will also examine to what extent these systems have similarities and diversities rather than simply being perceived to be in opposition to one and another. Finally, this essay will look into the attitude of the British Muslims represented by the three organizations, Hizbut Tahrir, Tablighi Jama'at, and Muslim Council of Britain, in dealing with the democratic system of Britain and Shura system.
In so doing, this essay will begin with a brief exploration of Islamic authority and representation system, consisting of state and government concepts, discourses and practices among Muslims from the revelation onwards with the Shura as the cornerstone. In addition, it will also look into the discourse of the West's representation system in its relation to the Christianity, secularism, and modernity with the democracy as the core of the matter. Finally, this essay aims to find the nature of three British Muslims organizations in understanding the democratic Britain.

Authority and representation in Islam
Muslims have a long history in maintaining private and public affairs. the believers to practice these noble teachings wherever they live.
Moreover, he states that private side of Muslim is scrutinized indirectly through its manifestation in the public order. 6 In other words, in terms of a state, as long as the rulers realize the Islamic teachings, it is obligatory for Muslims to endorse such government. It is similar to the Islamic jurisprudence that regulates religious practices with a view to maintain the individual's well-being through his or her social well-being.
As the result, as suggested by Tariq Ramadhan, there is no real practice of religion without personal investment in the community. 7 An-Naim also worries about Islamic state establishment. For him, it is better to separate religion from the state to enhance and to promote genuine religious observance, to affirm, nurture, and regulate the role of Islam in the public life of the community. Moreover, he argues, enforcing Islamic laws cannot be enacted by the state, because the outcome will necessarily be the political will of the state and not Islamic religious laws. 8 Although the aforementioned matters are still in discussion among Muslims scholars, many Muslims believe that the Shura system is their Islamic government model and being practiced in some Muslim countries.

Shura as an Islamic representation system
Shura is one of the most important elements of the Islamic political system. It is defined as "seeking the advice and consultation of schol- ars and informed people in the affairs that concern the nation and its interests". 9 Shura has also been defined as "decision-making in the light of the concerned parties in the country". Nevertheless, al-Sulami argues that Shura does not have a universally accepted definition and it has had very different interpretations in its long history. For him, Shura has two evolutional interpretations. Firstly, Shura is a system of government which must be based on the free-will of the Muslim communities. It was in the Prophet and first-four Caliphates era in seventh century. Its main tools are free will in selecting the Caliph, consultation process with the people or member of the Shura council related to the public matters, and majority opinion in decision making. Secondly, in the Caliphates of the Islamic empire era in fifteenth until seventeenth century, Shura was treated as an advisement council, which was the ruler asking people particularly religious leaders, tribal leaders or influential people, merely for advice, though the decision is on the ruler's hand. 10 The order to implement Shura in the Muslim life is believed to come directly from the God through His Prophet. The Quran stresses Shura as an essential principle in all Muslim affairs. 11 However, al-Sulami said that The Quran asserted the principle of Shura as a comprehensive concept without imposing a specific mould, leaving that to Muslim societies to determine according to its junctures and circumstances. 12 Notwithstanding, the sovereignty of God is the ultimate foundation for various Shura models. In some Muslim countries such as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Oman, Shura, as Mishal argues, represents the general framework within which the Islamic ruling authorities, legislative, and judiciary bodies must act. They believe that this system will exclude obstinacy and stubbornness, helps draw accurate conclusions, realize the unity of the nation, and harmonizes the hearts of its people, since the decision taken by the ruling authorities cannot be implemented unless they were gained at through this process. 13 However, the ruler in Islam has an absolute power to make a decision as long as he observes the teachings of the Quran. Thus, Shura council members, who are not an elected body but rather a selected one, can only advise the ruler. In addition, the ruler is responsible only to God and not to the parliaments, as in the democratic political system. 14 In contrast, Tariq Ramadhan argues that Shura could be practiced like democracy. For instance, the creation of Shura council members imposes itself and necessitates structuring the modes of people's consultation which allows for the election of members to this council. Moreover, for him, the ruler has to responsible not only to the God but also to the people. 15 Hence, it is important to explore the concept of the type of authority and representation in the West in ruling the interests of its people.

Authority and representation in the West
Western people have experienced a period of hundreds years to establish their governmental institution as it is witnessed today. The struggle to obtain the authority and the representation of the people has re-

Democracy as the West representation system
According to Ramadhan, the democratic principle is founded on the idea that nothing should be imposed upon people except the one that is decided by people themselves, by majority, only in the mirror of rationality. This means that democracy is against the absolute power which is unreal such as religious authority: God and the sacred are Besides some similarities between Shura and democracy such as the aims of these systems to struggle for prosperity, freedom, justice and equal representation of the people, obviously there are two big differences between the two. Firstly, according to an-Nabhani, Shura is different to democracy in terms of its authority. For him, Shura is for seeking opinions, and a decision is in the ruler's hand, while democracy is for ruling which is managed by the parliament whose members are chosen in the election. 28 Secondly, al-Sulami argues, the sovereignty in Shura and democracy is also different. Shura's sovereignty is in God; conversely democracy's sovereignty is in the people. 29 The British Muslims, who live directly in the heart of a democratic country, require a proper attitude to face such a condition. On the one hand, they have to deal with the political system in the country, and on the other hand they have to adhere to the instructions of Islam with its own political system.

Muslim in Britain and their representation need
Some Muslims believe that engagement with the British political system is the effective and the only way of getting their problems addressed.
In addition, Ansari argues, when they convince that Islam highly appreciates the values of equality and justice it will be better to introduce them to the wider society in Britain by means of democratic strate- gies. 32 Consequently, this condition leads them involved in both local and national government as a means of representation.
Early political attitudes of the British Muslims, say Pakistani, were to remain involved in the country of origin by establishing Pakistani political parties branches in Bradford. As soon as they settled in the country with their families, the need for local social and educational issues emerged. According to Ansari, in these early years around 1960s, religious issues were not the main concern; rather they asked for the recognition of their ethnicity and culture to provide them with a framework to engage in public sphere. 33 In 1980s, the British Muslims' agenda widened to religious needs issue such as building mosques, halal (permitted) meat, more 'Islamic' school environment, and so forth. In this term, the British Muslims

Tablighi Jama'at
Tablighi Jama'at organization is a movement that began in India in the late 1920s and is devoted to the propagation (tabligh) of Islam. As said by Eickelman and Piscatori, this organization is principally directed toward fellow Muslims whose faith seems to have been corrupted and lapsed. Appealing originally to illiterate or semiliterate peasants but gradually attracting followers in the professions and among the well-educated, Tablighi Jama'at expanded as a transnational Muslims organization, at first, from the region of Mewat to most of the Indian sub continent, and, then, from South Asia to the Arab world, Africa, Southeast Asia, Europe and North America. 38 Metcalf says that the center of the Tablighi Jama'at in Britain is in Dewsbury West Yorkshire. By 2007, their members spread all over Britain through 600 of Britain's 1350 mosques and are well organized. 39 In addition, Metcalf says that the members of this organization are polite, courteous and well behaved, and can be easily spotted in the streets. They wear caps, beard, long shirts which go below the ankle. 38 Dale F. Eickelman and James Piscatori, Muslim Politics, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1996, 148. 39 Barbara D. Metcalf, "New Medinas, the Tablighi Jama'at in America and Europe", in Barbara D. Metcalf, (ed.), Making Muslim Space in North America and Europe, California: University of California Press, 1996, 110. They might also wear jackets and sneakers, and keep very much to themselves. 40 As Maulana Muhammad Ilyas, the founder of this organization, focused, Tablighi Jama'at is an organization that gives no room to national boundaries or to nationalism. It pays no attention to the nation-state and no concern for worldly progress. 41 It means that Tablighi Jama'at is not intended to deal with the political system in a certain place. In other words, Tablighi Jama'at tolerates and obeys the local government, but not involve in its political system, in order to give them a space for their movement. As stated by Eickelman and Piscatori, Tablighi Jama'at contributes toward the concretization of a religious and social identity that is not based on the political culture of the nationstate. 42 Thus, the members of this organization seem to be able to deal with the problems of cultural, religious pluralism and political issues.
In addition, Tablighi Jama'at brings Islam along with them in an extroverted manner and non-political.
Tablighi Jama'at in Britain also implements this doctrine. In the opinion of this organization, as Metcalf argues, ideally, British government and wider non-Muslim societies in Britain are not constituted as an 'other' but, ultimately, rendered invisible, although, a Tablighi would insist, and be treated with respect. 43 The end result, focusing one's own and one's community's religious life and avoiding religion in public life converges with a secular approach to politics and religion. To conclude, for Tablighi Jama'at, democratic or Shura system may not be an essential matter in representing their aspirations as long as they are 40 Barbara D. Metcalf, "New Medinas, the Tablighi Jama'at in America and Europe",110. 41 Barbara D. Metcalf, "New Medinas, the Tablighi Jama'at in America and Europe", 119. 42 Dale F. Eickelman and Piscatori,Muslim Politics,148. 43 Barbara D. Metcalf,"New Medinas,the Tablighi Jama'at in America and Europe",124. allowed to preach Islam in a peaceful way. In contrast with Tablighi Jama'at, some British Muslims also founded Hizbut Tahrir. This organization has a strong opposition to the political system of the host country.

Hizbut Tahrir
Hizbut Tahrir   The members of Hizbut Tahrir recognize that democracy is as Western and un-Islamic. In their opinion, democracy is the rule of people, by people and for people. The basic of a democratic system is that people posses the right of sovereignty, choice and implementation. In addition, the sources of democratic system are from the people, not from The Quran and Hadith. 48 Consequently, democracy is known by them as illicit. It is similar to Taqiuddin An-Nabhany's condemnation on democracy as a system of unbelief that is incompatible with Islamic law. Furthermore, he said that there was a big distinction between democratic and Shura system. 49 This argumentation stressed the rejection of this organization to the British governmental system. As a result, Muslims in Britain should choose whether to be British or Muslims.
The aim of this organization is to promote the Caliphate of Islam or an Islamic state throughout the world. As reported by the British Muslim magazine, Q-News, cited by Ansari, according Hizbut Tahrir, since the democratic system is 'a system of Kufr (unbelief), based on the creed of separating religion from life', a system which enacts the laws is un-Islamic. Hence, voting and political participation in a democratic and non-Islamic state should be forbidden to Muslims. 50 In cooperative manner to the democratic system in Britain, Muslim Council of Britain is of the Islamic organization which is tolerating this system. The MCB printed half a million copies of a pocketbook entitled "Know Your Rights & Responsibilities" in 2004 which were distributed to Muslims across Britain. According to Iqbal Sacranie, this book sought to "reassure Muslims about their rights and remind them of the responsibilities we all share to help build a more just and cohesive society".

Muslim Council of Britain
Moreover, it also encouraged the British Muslims to "participate in the mainstream political parties with a view to seeking the common good". 53 In viewing its involvement in British democratic system, besides instituted democratic model in its committee board like a number of checks and balances to preserve the representation of its members, 54 MCB is recognized as moderate and is represented most British Muslims by many in the British political establishment. In addition, they knew that MCB encouraged the British Muslims that they had a duty to vote. In its advice for British Muslims, MCB suggested that Muslims should not opt out of the political life of the country and voluntarily give up their social and political rights. Neither should they surrender their duty to make their opinions and their advice known on matters of concern to themselves and wider society. 56

Conclusion
Combination between Shura and democracy systems which are practiced by Tablighi Jama'at and MCB in Britain are continuation of political authority and representation searching in Islam, which was practiced earlier in the past. Although they have a different way to deal with the democratic Britain, they have the same message to acknowledge Islamic political system as a compatible system to the West. In this manner, British government may cooperate with them.
Furthermore, British government has to be careful to treat an organization such as Hizbut Tahrir in practicing its radical politics view within democratic Britain. It is because multicultural Britain, as a valuable result of long process of British civilization, will be in jeopardy to accom-54 See http://www.mcb.org.uk/faq/faq.php#3 last accessed 5 June 2009. 55 See http://www.mcb.org.uk/media/presstext.php?ann_id=190 last accessed 5 June 2009. 56 Humayun Ansari, the Infidel Within, 247.