Islam faces democracy

Nurrohman, Lecturer, Sunan Gunung Jati State Institute for Islamic Studies, Bandung, nurrohman2002@yahoo.com

Reports by Muslim scholars concluding that most Muslim countries are undemocratic comes as no surprise. Although musyawarah mufakat (deliberation directed by wisdom to reach consensus) is widely accepted among Muslims, not all of them can easily accept democracy.

To some scholars, deliberation is not the same as democracy. Deliberation is ordered by the Koran, while democracy is not. The main argument rejecting democracy is that the truth and the good cannot be dictated by the vote of the majority. Gambling, adultery, liquor are all forbidden under religious teaching, which cannot be changed even if the majority of people so desire. The truth and the good should come from God. God is the final measure of the truth. Human beings did not understand the truth and what is good until God revealed them through His prophet.

Therefore, the attitude of Muslims toward regulations that are clearly featured in the Koran is just taken for granted. These type of regulations are deemed sacred and immutable. It should be imposed wherever and whenever. They are outside the domain of ijtihad (interpretation). To the mutasyabihat (verses that have no clear meaning), laymen are not allowed to interpret them. Muslims should leave these matters to ulemas who are qualified to understand Islamic teaching. This is because just one opinion is right while the other is wrong. Clerics should search for it individually or collectively. In this regard, ulemas behave on behalf of God.

In this regard, the view that only a limited form of democracy, called teo-democracy, which is held by some Muslim scholars, such as al-Maududi a noted Pakistani scholar, has a big influence in Indonesia. According to this view, democracy must be directed by religious tenets or sharia (Islamic law). To guarantee that the law does not contradict sharia, the body, made up of ulemas, should be established to oversee the law-making process that is commonly conducted by the legislature.

Therefore, that body should have the power to halt or revoke the law, even though it has been accepted by the legislature, if they deem it to be not in accordance with sharia.

This type of thinking is based on the premise that religion cannot be separated with politics or state (al-Islam din wa dawlah). Sharia is viewed as an exclusive law rather than an inclusive law which offers laymen the opportunity to participate in formulating its rule. Iran adopts this view. Taken from the concept suggested by Khomaeni, Iran has a body named the Guardian Council that can veto legal affairs. This model of interpretation, although it is not democratic, has large numbers of followers in Muslim countries.

To develop democracy in Muslim countries, therefore, another model of interpretation should also be introduced. Of course, this model may be the opposite of the former model. Muslims should begin to accept that the truth not only came from revelations carried by the Prophet but that it possibly came from the human mind itself through common sense. The combined effort of human minds, known as ijtihad, should be defined. Borrowing Fazlul Rahman words, it is a multiple effort of thinking minds -- some naturally better than others, and some better than others in various areas -- which confront each other in an open arena of debate, resulting eventually in overall consensus.

In an open arena of debate, all opinion, wherever it comes from and whoever addresses it, should be treated equally. Nobody should be given a privileged position. Everybody has the right to participate in decision making, especially when it is concerns public matters. If consensus cannot be achieve through debate, a majority vote will be taken.

This thinking is based on the assumption that human beings actually know what is good and bad. With or without revelations, men and women, irrespective of their religion, are actually aware of what is wrong and right, as long as their opinion is guided by their consciousness. Consciousness is the spirit of God that is given to each person, man or woman, from the early beginning. That is what makes human beings different to animals.

Therefore, in public matters, as long as there is no political engineering or oppression, vox populi vox Dei (the voice of the people is the voice of God).

Prophet Muhammad was once asked by his friend, who was unable to make a decision, for suggestions. He answered that it is better to ask your own consciousness.

From the above explanation, it is clear that there are two types of thinking that can be used to encourage or discourage the process of democratization in Indonesia. It is also clear that these two types of thinking are linked to theology. Since both of them are rooted in Islamic teaching, it is up to each Muslim to choose. What we must bear in mind is that someone or some group should not be allowed to undermine the other. Freedom of thinking should be preserved.

I personally choose the second type of thinking because it is more appropriate to develop democracy in Indonesia.