Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO08108 | Abu Bakar Bashir: Jihad or Tyranny of Leadership?
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO08108 | Abu Bakar Bashir: Jihad or Tyranny of Leadership?
    Muhammad Haniff Hassan

    09 October 2008

    download pdf

    Commentary

    Abu Bakar Bashir resigned from the Indonesian Mujahidin Council (MMI) recently, claiming that its leadership system was unislamic. Did he get it right this time?

    THE INDONESIAN Mujahidin Council, or Majlis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI), is an umbrella organization of Indonesian Islamist groups, headed by Abu Bakar Bashir until his surprise resignation in July this year. His exit was over his claim that MMI’s leadership system was “unislamic”. He argued that MMI favoured the democratic style of leadership over the rule of shariah. The concept of democracy, to him, departs from the Islamic concept of shura (consultation) as the final decision in democracy lies in the rule of the majority, whereas the ultimate decision in shura rests on the shoulders of the leader. This renders democracy incompatible with shariah, and therefore “unislamic”. The most critical part of his assertion was that members of an Islamic organization should accord the leader the final say in all matters.

    Analysts have suggested that Bashir’s assertions on his version of shura are an effort to mask the more likely reason for his departure: the power struggle within MMI. Irrespective of the reasons, does Bashir have a case that the leadership system in MMI is unislamic? He raised two points of contention: first, democracy is unislamic, and second, the leader’s final say is imperative in an Islamic organization.

    Refuting Bashir on His Own Terms

    With regards to Bashir’s first point, a careful study of the Pedoman Umum Perjuangan Al-Jama’ah Al-Islamiyyah, better known as PUPJI — the general guide of JI — reveals that Bashir’s reasoning clearly matches point 7 of article 28. This article states that “when there is difference between the majority and the views of the emir, the final decision will be in the hands of the emir”. This statement resonates with his official reason for leaving MMI. It is based on the understanding that there is only one form of leadership supported in the shariah. While this may fit Bashir’s mode of thinking, established Islamic scholarship, however, does not agree with him.

    By standing by the statement on leadership, Bashir is actually potraying himself as having an ideological character that is rooted in absolutism. An absolutist line of thinking causes one to regard an indefinite matter as having a definite character. Rather than seeing disputable matters as social, ideological or intellectual constructs based on ijtihad (independent reasoning), absolutists tend to believe they are instead immutable principles of the religion. Eventually, this mode of thinking drives Bashir to the assumption that there is only one form of leadership in shariah.

    Scholars, however, have long disagreed on this issue and on the nature of decision making in an Islamic organization. There is no consensus on whether shura in Islam is mere consultation or is bound to the view of the emir.

    The Quran does not provide an absolute model of governance save the enjoinment to uphold shura. Neither is the Sunnah (the Prophet’s Traditions) clear-cut on this matter. For instance, in signing the historical peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the Prophet acted against the majority of his companions. In the case of the battle of Uhud, however, the Prophet followed the will of the majority and fought the enemies outside Medina, although he personally felt that the better option was not to go to war. This clearly shows that there is flexibility in the system of Islamic leadership.

    In matters which are open to dispute in understanding divine or prophetic texts such as the above, scholars usually resort to the fundamental juristic formula la inkar fi al-mukhtalaf fihi (no absolute negation in disputable matters). This means one needs to respect the freedom of others to believe and act however they wish within accepted interpretations of the texts.

    This, however, does not negate the value of discussion on such matters; in fact, it is encouraged in the spirit of critical thinking, and of course within the ethics of disagreement. The fundamental point here is that parties with contrasting viewpoints should never impose their will on others as these matters are open to interpretation. The fact that variance is permitted in decision-making therefore does not justify one to render opposing views as unislamic.

    Absolutism

    Such a principle, however, does not augur well with those who subscribe to absolutism. When they feel they are right on a seemingly fundamental issue, they would reject any disagreement, consequently judging opposing views as having deviated from the shariah. This explains the harsh attitude they adopt in differing with others. Differences in non-fundamental issues are therefore seen as matters of principle that are not open to interpretation. This is why they keep splintering and forming groups anew whenever they have fierce ideological divisions.

    Accordingly, Bashir’s attempt to legitimise his struggle in the name of Islam should not blind people to believe that he is infallible. He is, on the contrary, a normal man who is prone to make mistakes, and is not at all free from human desires. Similarly, there is no guarantee that he will not fall into the trap of “absolute power corrupts absolutely”. In this regard, Bashir argues that total obedience of the leader’s final decision should be observed from the lowest ranking member to the uppermost ranking leader of the highest council of the organization, regardless of how unpopular the decision made by the chief leader may be.

    His line of argument runs parallel to his second contention – that followers owe total obedience to the emir. This is also refutable by declarations published by leaders of the jihad movement in Egypt who have recanted their views. Their revisions on jihad clearly show how Bashir’s argument runs counter to the Quran.

    An example of the declarations, which shook the intellectual foundations of Al-Qaeda, is the one made by Sayyid Imam Al-Sharif a.k.a Abdul Qader Abdul Aziz or Dr. Fadl, an influential ideologue who is one of the leaders of Egyptian Islamic Jihad. He asserts, in article 13 of his revisions in Arabic, that a member of an Islamic group should not sacrifice his mind on the pretext of sam’an wa ta’atan (total obedience). He iterates that total obedience is only for God and His Messenger, that is based on the evidence from the Quran and the Prophet’s Traditions, and not to the emir. It is for this that God has enjoined the return to textual evidence in matters of dispute with the authorities (Quran, 4:59). One should therefore not obey his emir when he is commanded to commit an objectionable act (Quran, 43:54).

    Wisdom in Majority View

    Bashir’s resignation produces vital learning points for activists in the name of religion. In a globalised world, one cannot afford to remain exclusive and elusive. Decisions, then, should not be made based on mere independent judgment of one single person or on assuming absolute truths. Islam already recognizes the value of collective wisdom as the Prophet himself has declared: “If you see divergence, you must follow the greater mass or larger group [of experts or authorities].” (Narrated by Ibn Majah.) Thus, Muslim jurists usually give weight to religious opinions that are agreed by many rather than by the few.

    While fundamentals should always be adhered to, space should also be given to variances in non- fundamental matters. Differences are part and parcel of life; they give colour to an otherwise world of dullness. It is never about “us and them”. It is about what is best, for all, in making the world a better place to live in.

    About the Authors

    Muhammad Haniff Hassan is Associate Research Fellow and Mohamed Redzuan Salleh a Research Analyst at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. 

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series

    Commentary

    Abu Bakar Bashir resigned from the Indonesian Mujahidin Council (MMI) recently, claiming that its leadership system was unislamic. Did he get it right this time?

    THE INDONESIAN Mujahidin Council, or Majlis Mujahidin Indonesia (MMI), is an umbrella organization of Indonesian Islamist groups, headed by Abu Bakar Bashir until his surprise resignation in July this year. His exit was over his claim that MMI’s leadership system was “unislamic”. He argued that MMI favoured the democratic style of leadership over the rule of shariah. The concept of democracy, to him, departs from the Islamic concept of shura (consultation) as the final decision in democracy lies in the rule of the majority, whereas the ultimate decision in shura rests on the shoulders of the leader. This renders democracy incompatible with shariah, and therefore “unislamic”. The most critical part of his assertion was that members of an Islamic organization should accord the leader the final say in all matters.

    Analysts have suggested that Bashir’s assertions on his version of shura are an effort to mask the more likely reason for his departure: the power struggle within MMI. Irrespective of the reasons, does Bashir have a case that the leadership system in MMI is unislamic? He raised two points of contention: first, democracy is unislamic, and second, the leader’s final say is imperative in an Islamic organization.

    Refuting Bashir on His Own Terms

    With regards to Bashir’s first point, a careful study of the Pedoman Umum Perjuangan Al-Jama’ah Al-Islamiyyah, better known as PUPJI — the general guide of JI — reveals that Bashir’s reasoning clearly matches point 7 of article 28. This article states that “when there is difference between the majority and the views of the emir, the final decision will be in the hands of the emir”. This statement resonates with his official reason for leaving MMI. It is based on the understanding that there is only one form of leadership supported in the shariah. While this may fit Bashir’s mode of thinking, established Islamic scholarship, however, does not agree with him.

    By standing by the statement on leadership, Bashir is actually potraying himself as having an ideological character that is rooted in absolutism. An absolutist line of thinking causes one to regard an indefinite matter as having a definite character. Rather than seeing disputable matters as social, ideological or intellectual constructs based on ijtihad (independent reasoning), absolutists tend to believe they are instead immutable principles of the religion. Eventually, this mode of thinking drives Bashir to the assumption that there is only one form of leadership in shariah.

    Scholars, however, have long disagreed on this issue and on the nature of decision making in an Islamic organization. There is no consensus on whether shura in Islam is mere consultation or is bound to the view of the emir.

    The Quran does not provide an absolute model of governance save the enjoinment to uphold shura. Neither is the Sunnah (the Prophet’s Traditions) clear-cut on this matter. For instance, in signing the historical peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the Prophet acted against the majority of his companions. In the case of the battle of Uhud, however, the Prophet followed the will of the majority and fought the enemies outside Medina, although he personally felt that the better option was not to go to war. This clearly shows that there is flexibility in the system of Islamic leadership.

    In matters which are open to dispute in understanding divine or prophetic texts such as the above, scholars usually resort to the fundamental juristic formula la inkar fi al-mukhtalaf fihi (no absolute negation in disputable matters). This means one needs to respect the freedom of others to believe and act however they wish within accepted interpretations of the texts.

    This, however, does not negate the value of discussion on such matters; in fact, it is encouraged in the spirit of critical thinking, and of course within the ethics of disagreement. The fundamental point here is that parties with contrasting viewpoints should never impose their will on others as these matters are open to interpretation. The fact that variance is permitted in decision-making therefore does not justify one to render opposing views as unislamic.

    Absolutism

    Such a principle, however, does not augur well with those who subscribe to absolutism. When they feel they are right on a seemingly fundamental issue, they would reject any disagreement, consequently judging opposing views as having deviated from the shariah. This explains the harsh attitude they adopt in differing with others. Differences in non-fundamental issues are therefore seen as matters of principle that are not open to interpretation. This is why they keep splintering and forming groups anew whenever they have fierce ideological divisions.

    Accordingly, Bashir’s attempt to legitimise his struggle in the name of Islam should not blind people to believe that he is infallible. He is, on the contrary, a normal man who is prone to make mistakes, and is not at all free from human desires. Similarly, there is no guarantee that he will not fall into the trap of “absolute power corrupts absolutely”. In this regard, Bashir argues that total obedience of the leader’s final decision should be observed from the lowest ranking member to the uppermost ranking leader of the highest council of the organization, regardless of how unpopular the decision made by the chief leader may be.

    His line of argument runs parallel to his second contention – that followers owe total obedience to the emir. This is also refutable by declarations published by leaders of the jihad movement in Egypt who have recanted their views. Their revisions on jihad clearly show how Bashir’s argument runs counter to the Quran.

    An example of the declarations, which shook the intellectual foundations of Al-Qaeda, is the one made by Sayyid Imam Al-Sharif a.k.a Abdul Qader Abdul Aziz or Dr. Fadl, an influential ideologue who is one of the leaders of Egyptian Islamic Jihad. He asserts, in article 13 of his revisions in Arabic, that a member of an Islamic group should not sacrifice his mind on the pretext of sam’an wa ta’atan (total obedience). He iterates that total obedience is only for God and His Messenger, that is based on the evidence from the Quran and the Prophet’s Traditions, and not to the emir. It is for this that God has enjoined the return to textual evidence in matters of dispute with the authorities (Quran, 4:59). One should therefore not obey his emir when he is commanded to commit an objectionable act (Quran, 43:54).

    Wisdom in Majority View

    Bashir’s resignation produces vital learning points for activists in the name of religion. In a globalised world, one cannot afford to remain exclusive and elusive. Decisions, then, should not be made based on mere independent judgment of one single person or on assuming absolute truths. Islam already recognizes the value of collective wisdom as the Prophet himself has declared: “If you see divergence, you must follow the greater mass or larger group [of experts or authorities].” (Narrated by Ibn Majah.) Thus, Muslim jurists usually give weight to religious opinions that are agreed by many rather than by the few.

    While fundamentals should always be adhered to, space should also be given to variances in non- fundamental matters. Differences are part and parcel of life; they give colour to an otherwise world of dullness. It is never about “us and them”. It is about what is best, for all, in making the world a better place to live in.

    About the Authors

    Muhammad Haniff Hassan is Associate Research Fellow and Mohamed Redzuan Salleh a Research Analyst at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. 

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info