What is the ruling on entering parliaments under the pretext that they are legislative councils and not executive ones, and does this entry constitute a deficiency in loyalty and disavowal?

The questioner : Is there a deficiency in the loyalty and disavowal of a Muslim when he enters parliaments or ministries on the grounds that they are legislative councils and not executive ones?

The Shaykh : Without a doubt, we say that it is not permissible for a Muslim, let alone a group of Muslims, to enter parliaments that were established in contradiction to the Shari'ah of Allah (Mighty and Majestic). This is because there are many texts in the Qur'an that forbid Muslims from showing loyalty to disbelievers and from showing loyalty to hypocrites and their like. How could the Lord of the Worlds not forbid helping disbelievers or hypocrites who are Muslims but are hypocrites, either in action or in belief? We know that parliaments today are systems that are not Islamic, and this is a fact that admits of no discussion whatsoever. Islam has been around for fourteen centuries and did not know of parliaments until the disbelievers invaded their homeland, seized their lands, and imposed their systems, ideas, and way of life upon them. Parliaments are based on the principle that rule belongs to the people, whereas in Islam, rule belongs to Allah. This is also one of the matters in which we praise Allah that there is no disagreement among Muslims, despite their differences in many other aspects, that rule is This is a fact that admits of no argument. So how can it be said that rule belongs to the people? Among the effects of these parliaments is not only that they are based on ruling by other than what Allah has revealed, but also the method and the way in which people gather in this council called the parliament, or translated as the Council of the Nation. The way these people reach their positions is not an Islamic method. This is because Allah (Mighty and Majestic) says in the clear text of the Noble Qur'an: Show me a parliament among the parliaments that is not the parliaments established in lands of disbelief and misguidance, but rather those that have afflicted the lands of Islam. Show me a parliament that does not contradict, in its method of electing members to the parliament, the previous verse: You all know that the parliamentary system, first of all, does not distinguish between the Muslim and the disbeliever, and this is sufficient for you to understand that what is built on a defective foundation is defective. If it does not distinguish between a Muslim and a disbeliever, that means the disbeliever has the right to vote just as the Muslim has the right to vote. Is there in Islam a place for a disbeliever who associates partners with Allah (Mighty and Majestic) in the Council of the Nation, in the Shura council? Far be it from Allah! It is even more so that this system, which did not distinguish between the Muslim and the disbeliever, does not distinguish between the woman and the man. Therefore, parliaments have become a mixed bag, as they say in Syria, with women in them and men. Then, among the results of this lack of distinction is that they do not distinguish between the righteous believer and the wicked believer, whether Ba'athist, communist, or atheist. The important thing is that his name is Muhammad ibn Ahmad; it is not important if he is George ibn Tanius; it is not important. They are all a group of citizens. Today, this brings to mind the word "dhimmis." The word "dhimmis" has been removed from the language of Muslims in this time, and in its place has been established a very soft, pleasant word, which is "citizens." You are a citizen, that's it. Jewish, Christian, communist, atheist, it doesn't matter. You are a citizen, and you have the right like any other person. Our Lord says: All these contradictions have made them equalize, so they equalized between the righteous and the wicked, between the man and the woman, between the Muslim and the disbeliever. This is the foundation of the parliament. How do Muslims who are zealous for Islam want to change the parliamentary system by entering this system, when the first thing they did upon entering was to believe in it, because they did not reach it except by this method that is in contradiction to the Shari'ah of Allah (Mighty and Majestic)? We were now surprised, or rather not surprised, by what is called the National Charter. What does this National Charter mean? It is a denial of You are a Muslim, you are a disbeliever, you are an atheist; you are all equal in this parliament. So do you imagine that a charter established on the basis of equalizing between the Muslim and the disbeliever can rule by what Allah has revealed, and that these few individuals from among the Muslims can change this system radically? Changing the system radically is not by following people in their misguidance. Rather, it is necessary, as Sayyid Qutb (may Allah have mercy on him) used to bring the phrase "there must be a clear break." There must be a clear break, just as the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) began his life in calling to Allah and fighting the tyrants by not leaning on them. And Allah the Exalted said: Far be it from him, but He said that to him so that we do not lean on these disbelievers and polytheists. The discussion on this is very long. Therefore, we do not advise today that a Muslim enter a parliament that is established on the disobedience of Allah (Mighty and Majestic). Very recently, I heard questions and answers directed to a high official in the parliament who represents an Islamic party. And he seemed to be speaking about matters related to the economy and expansion for the people, and so on, and did not say a word about reforming the religious situation. Is this how one enters the parliament to work, as the disbelievers work in their lands in material, economic, agricultural, and farming matters, and so on? So my answer to your question is that it is not permissible for a Muslim to enter the parliament, because if he enters it with the intention to reform, he will become "parliamentarized" himself and will proceed with the parliament.