Islamic view on Protests by Shaykh Ḥātim b. ʿĀrif al-ʿAwnī

Disclaimer: Please find a loosely translated piece from Shaykh Ḥātim’s website/Facebook post. The translation is a draft and not edited so therein will be few mistakes in the better choice of words but overall meaning is the same. Also, this article is meant to provide a normative perspective not readily available in the English language.

A criticism one may find is that the answer fails to recognize the application of said theories (i.e. in what situation can a protest ever be compulsory given the broad political spectrum?) and the post fails to recognize the reality of protests and clear conditions.

Shaykh Ḥātim says,

Praise be to God for the greatness of His blessings, and prayers and peace be upon the Messenger of God, his wives, and his descendants.

Furthermore: In response to a questioner about the rule on peaceful demonstrations wherein no weapons are raised, no blood is shed, and no harm is done to people and property, I say (and may God grant success):

Peaceful demonstrations are not an armed revolt against rulers; Therefore, peaceful demonstrations have nothing to do with the jurists’ reports about revolt and the rulings thereof; because it is not a revolt, and whoever considered it as such has made a clear mistake.

Peaceful demonstrations are a means of expressing an opinion, a means of change, and a means of pressuring the ruler in order for him to bow down to the will of the people. So if the opinion is just, and the change is for the better, and the will of the people is legitimate = the demonstration would be permissible, provided that it does not entail greater corruption than the desired result. For the rule of demonstrations is the rule of means, and the means are the rule of the goals and the results (فحكم المظاهرات حكم الوسائل، وللوسائل حكم الغايات والمآلات).

Although the means are among public interests (من المصالح المرسلة), the determination of whose legitimacy does not depend on the mentioning of the text thereof; because the texts in general and the objectives of the Sharīʿah (ومقاصد الشريعة) indicate their legitimacy; for the predecessors of the esteemed Companions did carry out a demonstration in its modern image:

For when the Companions, headed by al-Zubayr b. al-ʿAwwām, Ṭalḥah b. ʿUbaydullāh, and ʿĀʾishah, God be pleased with them all, came out on the the day of the Camel with a request for the blood of ʿUthmān, God be pleased with him, and they were in thousands upon thousands in number, and they travelled from Ḥijāz to ʿIrāq, they did not go out to fight initially (as indicated by Ahl ʾl-Sunnah when telling about this incident).

And if those thousands did not go out to fight, then it only remains to say that they came out to express their objection to the lack of any punishment imposed on the killers of ʿUthmān, may God be pleased with him, and to put pressure on the Emir of the Faithful and the Caliph of the Muslims ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib, may God be pleased with him; in order for him to impose a punishment on the killers of ʿUthmān, may God be pleased with him.

And this is a peaceful demonstration, in the full meaning of the word, that took place in the time of the first generation of the esteemed Companions, and ʿAlī, God be pleased with him, did not refute them for their action, nor did the scholars forbid it, nor did they describe it as a revolt against the ruler or an act of mischief; for the mischief happened during an emergency and was an alien therein.

What is important is the position of ʿAlī, may God be pleased with him, for he is the one against whom that demonstration took place and, despite that, he did not come against those who merely congregated for the purpose of coming to ʿIrāq. And had their congregation and and travel to ʿIrāq been prohibited, he would have denied that right to them. Rather, even if he denied them that right, it suffices that al-Zubayr, Ṭalḥah, and ʿĀʾishah, may God be pleased with them, along with the rest of the Companions, disagree with him, to show that their demonstration is a matter of disagreement. This is on the assumption that ʿAlī, may God be pleased with him, has denied them their right to demonstrate, and this is not what happened.

There cannot be a denial on the validity of the protest with regard to this great historical event and what this wrongdoing entails (من مفسدة); because this special wrongdoing (مفسدته الخاصة) has nothing to do with the veracity of the the action that the Companions did, and it does not contradict the fact that the experts among the Companions (فقهاء الصحابة) and the leaders of the Ummah (وسادة الأمة) allowed this action; because the wrongdoing (مفسدته) was carried out in an emergency and some wrongdoers (ومن مفسدِين) wanted to divert it from its peaceful purpose (as decided by the Sunnah with regard to this incident).

Although the legitimacy of peaceful demonstrations does not need to be demonstrated by this famous historical event, because its doctrinal (fiqh) aspect does not need any special text (لنص خاص)(as before), this event obligates those who follow the precedents, even without understanding (ولو دون فقه), to abide by their action that allows peaceful demonstrations.

There is no doubt that assessing the good and bad purposes of a demonstration (مصالح المظاهرة ومفاسدها) varies from case to case, country to country, and demonstration to demonstration. And the country whose regulations accepts demonstrations is not the same as the country that prevents them, the evils of demonstrations in the first country are reduced, and in the second country they are increased.

And every Islamic government should legislate its own laws in order for these regulations to be used as a means of pressure from the people on these governments; because this is a guarantee for these governments from drifting to dangerous deviations, which is the deviation of tyranny; Tyranny is oppression, and tyranny is considered tyranny in this world and the next, and states do not exist and last except to the extent of their justice (ولا تقوم الدول ولا تزول إلا بقدر عدلها).

The legitimization of the people’s evaluation of the ruler is an Islamic law (وتشريعُ تقويم الشعب للحاكم تشريعٌ إسلاميٌّ) and a wise approach, preceded by the first Caliph of Islām Abū Bakr al-Ṣiddīq, may God be pleased with him, where he said in his first sermon after taking over the Caliphate: “O people, I have been appointed as a trustee for you, and I am not better than you. If I do well, help me, and if I erred, then correct me … », until the end of this confirmed sermon.

Here he is the first Caliph, who orders that they should correct him if he erred, thus laying this Rāshidī (governmental) principles of popular censorship of the ruler, and to legitimize this pressure on him; In order for him to correct his mistake, should he need correction.

In summary, the rule of peaceful demonstrations is that: The basis in it is permissibility, and is not forbidden; unless it entails a greater evil than benefit (مفسدةٌ أعظم من مصلحتها). And it may be a duty (واجبةً): when the evil cannot be corrected except through it (إصلاحُ المفاسد إلا بها), in the absence of the emergence of any greater evil (مفسدة أكبر).

And stating that it is forbidding it at all times, and explaining that it always leads to evils that are larger than its benefits = this is something that is not stated in law: narrated and rational, and denied by reality:

☼ There is no special text of revelation texts (the Qurʾān or Sunnah) indicating the prohibition of demonstrations, so Muslims are obligated to obey by submitting to it.

☼ And the mind never rejects it, because of the absence of any tradition that defines it as evil.

☼ And the reality attests that some demonstrations have been useful, beneficial, and helpful, while some others have been to the contrary. So it cannot be claimed that its presence indicates that it is forbidden.

This is the rule of demonstrations, as determined by the principles and rules of knowledge.

And God knows best.

Continuation (mentioned by the shaykh in response to one of the questioners on his Facebook page):

The demonstration in which flags, goals, and targets does not deviate from the previous explanation, especially if reform is not possible except through demonstration; for if its benefits are more than its evils, then it is permissible. This is the rule of participating in this demonstration. As for for the ruling on demonstrators, each one has its own rule: For an individual cannot ask for any right except when this right is permissible, and his participation in a demonstration has a right and a wrong as long as its benefits are more than its evils it is permissible under the following condition, which is that he should not ask for anything but right, and he cannot request anything that is evil.

And cooperating with violators (المخالفين) in the reform and the realization of a right is permissible; For the Prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, used the non-Muslims in many incidents of the Prophetic Biography.

Publication date: 20/07/1435 H