The administrative system is a style used to perform a task, and is also one of its means, so it does not require specific evidence. It is sufficient for it to have general evidence that indicates its origin. It would be wrong to say that these styles are human actions, which should therefore be conducted according to the divine rules. This is because the evidence for these actions has come with regards to their origin in a general form. Thus it includes all actions that branch out from that origin, unless there is divine evidence that relates to a subsidiary action, in which case the action must follow that evidence. For instance Allah (swt) says;

“And pay out the Zakat” [TMQ At-Tauba: 11]

, which is a general evidence. Then the evidences came regarding the subsidiary actions which branched out from it, such as the amount of Nisab, the Zakat collectors and the categories of things from which Zakat is to be taken. All these are actions derived from, “And pay out the Zakat.” There are no evidences regarding the manner by which the Zakat collectors have to collect the Zakat. For example, do they go riding or walking? Do they hire other employees to help them or not? Do they have to establish headquarters where they would all meet? Would they have warehouses where they would store everything they had collected? Would these houses be underground or built like grain houses? Would the cash Zakat be collected in bags or coffers? All these actions and the like are, in fact, subsidiary actions originating from “And pay out the Zakat.” The general evidence covers them all, as there are no specific evidences for them; and this is the case with all the styles. Thus, the style is an action subsidiary to an action i.e. to the origin that has general evidence. Therefore, the style does not require evidence, because the evidence of its origin serves as evidence for it as well.

As for the establishment of the administration, i.e. the establishment of those who would manage the citizens’ interests in every utility that needs an administrative work, this would be categorised as an original action and not a subsidiary one; hence it requires evidence. Its evidence is deduced from the actions of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) as He (pbuh) used to perform the ruling and the administration. He (pbuh) conveyed the message, executed it and discharged the Muslims’ affairs. With regards to the Tableegh (conveying) this is well known. With regards to the execution, the revelation came and ordered Him to collect the Sadaqah, to cut the hand of the thief, to stone the adulterer, to lash the slanderer and to kill the enemy; all of which are executive actions. He used to destroy the idols by his own hand, which is execution, and He would also send people to remove them. He (pbuh) would kill in the battlefield and take prisoners of war, order people to observe justice and established it. He would punish all the various wrongdoers and rebels and order people to adhere to all that He brought to them. All of this is execution.

As for his role in managing the affairs, He (pbuh) established a system of administration for the various departments and appointed secretaries to run those departments. He (pbuh) used to run people’s affairs in Madinah and He appointed secretaries to assist Him with the running of the various departments. Ali Ibnu Abi Talib used to be the notary of the oaths and treaties, which was an administrative duty and not a ruling post. Al Mu’ayqib ibnu Abi Fatima was in charge of his official stamp, an administrative duty and not a ruling post. Al-Bukhari reported in the history from Muhammad bin Bashaar from his grandfather Mu’ayqib, who said; “The stamp of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was made of iron covered with silver and it was with me (in my hand). Mu’ayqib was responsible for the stamp of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh).” Mu’ayqib Ibnu Abi Fatima was also the secretary in charge of the spoils and booty. Huzayfah Ibnul-Yaman was the collector of fruit levies of Hijaz, and ‘Abdullah Ibnu Arqam was the registrar of tribes and their waters and so on. All this serves as evidence that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) ran the administration in addition to carrying out his role as a ruler. However, He (pbuh) had determined for each one of those directors the type of task He had appointed them to do, such as recording the spoils and booty, or the assessment and collection of fruit levies or the like. He (pbuh) however, did not specify the subsidiary actions, which the directors would follow to accomplish their tasks. This non-specification meant that those actions are subsidiaries of the origin. Therefore, those people ordered to carry out those tasks would have been free to choose any styles they wished in order to accomplish the tasks assigned to them and discharge the interests in the most effective way.

Running the government’s business and the people’s offices, departments and administrations, requires the carrying out of affairs whose task is to ensure the management of the State’s business and the discharge of the people’s interests. Each Maslahah (office) would be headed by a general manager, and each Da’irah (department) and Idarah (administration) would be headed by a director, who would run its affairs and be directly responsible for it. Those directors would be answerable to the general director in charge of their offices, departments or administrations from a professional side, and answerable to the Waali and the ‘Amil with regards to abiding by the rules and general regulations.

The Qadhi al-Mazaalim has the mandatory power to remove any ruler or civil servant, and He also has the right to remove the Khaleefah.

The Qadhi al-Mazaalim has the right to remove the rulers, for the ruler is appointed by a contract, known as the contract of assignment which is also called the contract of appointment (Taqleed). The Khaleefah has the right of the Wilayah that is the ruling, and He has the right of appointment, which is the assignment, and the appointment can only be done with clear wording. Thus the removal of the ruler appointed by the Khaleefah would be a termination of that contract, and the Khaleefah undoubtedly reserves that right. This is because the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) appointed the Wulah and removed them. The Khulafaa’ Ar-Rashidoon also appointed the Wulah and removed them; the Khaleefah could also delegate to those whom He appointed the right to appoint and remove. However, the court of Mazaalim does not have the right to remove the rulers on behalf of the Khaleefah, for it does not act on his behalf in appointing and removal. it rather acts on his behalf in looking into the Mazaalim. So if the presence of that ruler in his Wilayah was a Mazlema, the court has the right to remove that Mazlema i.e. it has the right to remove that ruler from office. Therefore, its power to remove the ruler is not done on behalf of the Khaleefah, but merely to remove the Mazlema. So the one whom it judges to be removed should be removed, even if the Khaleefah does not agree with the judgement. This is because the removal of that ruler would be the removal of a Mazlema, and this applies to everyone, including the Khaleefah, for the judgement of the judge applies to everyone. As for its power to remove the Khaleefah, this would also be by a judgement aimed at removing a Mazlema. This is because if the Khaleefah were in a situation that necessitates his removal, or in a situation as a result of which He should be removed, then his stay in office would be a Mazlema. It is the court of Mazaalim that judges the removal of Mazaalim, so it would order his removal. Therefore, the judgement of the court of Mazaalim to remove the Khaleefah would be a judgement aimed at removing a Mazlema.

The court of Mazaalim has the power to look into any Mazlema, whether the Mazlema were perpetrated by government employees, or related to a contradiction of the Shar’a by the Khaleefah, or related to the meaning of a legislative text in the constitution, the canons or the various Shari’ah rules adopted by the Khaleefah, or related to the imposing of a tax, or any other matter.

This is because the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) refused to fix the prices when the Sahabah requested Him to do so after the prices had soared, and He (pbuh) considered price fixing as a Mazlema. He (pbuh) also considered the illegal arrangements of the peoples’ access to irrigation as a Mazlema. This proves that if the action of the ruler contradicted the truth (Haqq), or violated the Shari’ah rules, it would be considered a Mazlema. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was a ruler over the Muslims and their Head of State.

Furthermore, if any action that is part of government business, performed by any member of the government, was in contradiction with the truth (Haqq), or if it violated the Shari’ah rules, it would be considered a Mazlema. This is because that person would be representative to the Khaleefah, acting on his behalf in the task assigned to Him in the government structure.

Therefore, the Hadith about pricing indicates that the offence committed by the Khaleefah is a Mazlema, and it is the court of justice that has the power to look into the Mazaalim. With regards to examining a text in the constitution or the canon, the constitution is the basic law and the canon is the decree of the Sultan. So examining that is examining the decree of the Sultan, which is also included in the Hadith about pricing, for it would be like examining the Khaleefah’s actions. Furthermore, Allah (swt) says;

“If you dispute about something refer it to Allah and the Messenger” [TMQ An- Nisa’a: 59],

i.e. if you disputed with the people in authority about a matter. If this dispute were about an article in the constitution or an article in the canon of the law, then it would be a dispute between the subjects and those in authority on a rule of Shari’ah, which must be referred to Allah and His Messenger. This would mean referring it to the court of Mazaalim, i.e. to the judgement of Allah and His Messenger (pbuh).

As for the mandatory power given to the judge of Mazaalim to look into the imposing of a tax, this is derived from the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) where He said;

“And I hope to meet Allah Azza wa-Jall without having anyone claiming a Mazlema against me, whether in blood or money.” If the Khaleefah took money from the subjects unlawfully, it would be a Mazlema; and taking money from the subjects that is not approved by the Shar’a is a Mazlema. Therefore, the court of Mazaalim has the right to investigate taxes for it is money taken from the subjects. Its investigation of tax affairs would be with the aim of ruling whether that tax is lawfully obliged by Shar’a on the Muslims, such as the money taken to feed the needy, which would not be a Mazlema; or whether that tax is not obliged by the Shar’a, such as the monies taken to build a dam that is not considered essential, which would therefore be a Mazlema that has to be removed. This is why the court of Mazaalim has the power to examine the taxes.

In the judiciary of Mazaalim, the court sitting is optional, and the summons of the defendant is not necessary, nor is the presence of a plaintiff. The court of Mazaalim has the right to look into a Mazlema even if nobody filed a claim. This is with regards to any Mazlema related to the people in the government structure, the Khaleefah’s violation of the Shari’ah rules, the meaning of any legislative text, the constitution or the canons adopted by the Khaleefah, the imposing of any tax, or related to the State’s oppression of its citizens and seizure (properties) from them by force, its transgression in terms of the collected properties (from them) or reducing the salaries of the employees and the army or delaying their payment.

This is because the evidence that confirms the need for a judicial court to look into a case does not apply to the court of Mazaalim for it is not always necessary to have a plaintiff. The court of Mazaalim looks into the Mazlema even if nobody filed a claim. It is also not necessary to summon the defendant, because it examines the Mazlema, without the need of his attendance. Therefore, the evidence regarding the necessity of a judicial court does not apply. This is due to what Abu Dawood and Ahmed narrated from ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, He said;

“The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) ordered that ‘the two disputing parties sit before the judge”, and his (pbuh) saying to Ali (rta);

“If the two disputing parties sat before you.” Therefore, the court of Mazaalim reserves the right to look into the Mazlema as it occurs without any restrictions such as time, place or court sitting. However, due to the standing of this court, as far as its mandatory power are concerned, it has always been surrounded by the elements of prestige and grandeur. In the times of the Sultans in Egypt and Ash-Sham, the Council of the Sultan, where the Mazaalim used to be dealt with, used to be known as the Dar al-’Adl (House of Justice), where the Sultan used to appoint deputies to act on his behalf, and the Qudhah (Judges) and the Fuqahah (Jurists) also used to attend. Al-Maqreezi mentioned in his book entitled, Al-Sulook Ila Ma’arifati Douwal Al-Mulook (The way to know the States of the kings), that the Sultan Al-Malik Al-Salih Ayyub appointed deputies to act on his behalf in the Dar al-Adal. They used to sit there to remove the Mazaalim, and to gather the witnesses, Qudhah and the Fuqahah. Therefore, there is no harm if the court of Mazaalim had a splendid house, for this would be Mubah, especially if this reflected the might of justice.

The Qadhi al-Mazaalim is appointed by the Khaleefah, or by the Qadhi al-Qudhah. His removal, accounting, reprimanding or transfer, is carried out by the Khaleefah, or by the court of Mazaalim - if the Khaleefah gave it such mandatory power. This is because the Mazaalim is wilayah that is exclusive to the Khaleefah. Thus the appointment of the Waali of Mazaalim must be by the Khaleefah. Besides, the Mazaalim are part of the judiciary, for they are the pronouncement of the Shari’ah rule by way of compulsion. The judge must be appointed by the Khaleefah; a matter that is confirmed by the Messenger of Allah’s actions, for He (pbuh) used to appoint the judges. All this serves as evidence that it is the Khaleefah who appoints the judge of Mazaalim, yet the Qadhi al-Qudhah could appoint the Qadhi al-Mazaalim if the Khaleefah made provisions for this in his appointment clause.

The removal of the Qadhi al-Mazaalim should, in principle, be the right of the Khaleefah, as it is He who has the right to appoint him. However, He has no right to remove Him if He was investigating a case submitted against the Khaleefah, the Muawin Tafweedh or the Qadhi al-Qudhah. This is based on the principle of; The Means to Haram is Haram”. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) used to personally take charge of the judiciary of Mazaalim and it has not been reported that He ever appointed a judge of Mazaalim on a general capacity i.e. giving Him a general Wilayah over the Mazaalim. The four of Khulafaa’ Ar-Rashidoon never appointed anyone over the Mazaalim. Ali used to personally be in charge of the Mazaalim; and He looked into several cases of Mazaalim. When ‘Abdul-Malik Ibnu Marwan became Khaleefah He fixed a particular day for the Mazaalim, where He would hold hearings without going into the investigations. If a problem arose and He needed a binding judgement to settle the Mazlema, He would refer it to his judge Abu Idriss Al-Azadi. Abu Idriss would then be the one who looked into the Mazaalim, for He was a judge and He dealt with the Mazaalim that the Khaleefah ‘Abdul-Malik would refer to him. When the Ameer of the believers ‘Umar Ibnu Abdel-Aziz (Rahim Allah) came, He himself dealt with the cases of Mazaalim, and put a halt to the Mazaalim of Banu Umayyah. Midway through the Abbasi (Abbasid) era, the Khulafaa’ used to delegate the cases of Mazaalim to a special judge. Since that date the judiciary of Mazaalim became separate from the Khaleefah, while before that the Khaleefah himself always carried it out. Therefore, the Khaleefah reserves the right to look into the Mazaalim himself, and He is allowed to appoint a judge of Mazaalim, and to remove Him and replace Him with another judge, thus it is permitted for the Khaleefah to do so i.e. it is a Mubah action.

It is also the Khaleefah who holds the judge of Mazaalim accountable, where He reprimands Him and removes him. This is because He is responsible for the Mazaalim and for the judge whom He appoints on his behalf to look into the Mazaalim. The Khaleefah is allowed to give the (head) Qadhi al-Mazaalim or to the Qadhi al-Qudhah the power to remove the Qadhi al-Mazaalim, reprimand, remove or transfer him. If He did so, they would have the mandatory power to remove, account and reprimand the Qadhi al-Mazaalim.

The position of Qadhi al-Mazaalim is not restricted to one person. The Khaleefah is allowed to appoint a number of judges for the Mazaalim according to the need, no matter how many they were. However, when it comes to the judgement, only one judge can pass the judgement. Yet it is permitted for other judges to sit with Him during the court proceedings, but they would only have a consultative role, and He would not be obliged to consider their opinion.

This is because the Khaleefah is permitted to appoint one or more deputies to act on his behalf. However, if there were several judges of Mazaalim, their mandatory power to look into the Mazaalim cannot be apportioned, for each one of them would have the right to look into the cases of Mazaalim. The Khaleefah is, however, allowed to confine a judge of Mazaalim to one province, or to confine Him to a certain type of cases, for He has the right to give a general Wilayah over the Mazaalim, or a specific Wilayah if He wished. He can also give a Wilayah over the whole of the State or confine it to a specific area or province. As for the fact that, when the judge of Mazaalim looks into a case, He should look into it on his own, this is because of what was mentioned earlier, that it is forbidden to have more than one judge looking into a particular case, while it is permitted to have more than one judge in the same area. However, it is permitted for other judges of Mazaalim to sit with Him in court in a consultative capacity only. He would not be obliged to consider their opinion, and it would be up to Him whether He wished them to sit with Him or not, for nobody should sit with the judge and distract Him while He looks into what has been confined to him. However, He could consult them once He retires from court.