The nature of Islam determines that the actions which humans perform in their capacity as humans are permissible for each man and woman without distinction, discrimination or differentiation. It also determines that these actions are made: obligatory (Wajib), forbidden (Muharrama), disliked (Makruh) and recommended (Mandub) without discrimination or differentiation. As for the actions that a male undertakes, in his capacity as a male and as a human as well, or the actions that a female undertakes in her capacity as a female and as a human as well: Allah has distinguished both of them in this regard and differentiated between them with respect to each other, whether in terms of obligation (Wujub), dislike (Karaha), recommendation (Nadb) or permissibility (Ibaha). Accordingly, we find that the Shari’ah has invested ruling and authority with the man as opposed to the woman.We also find that it has entrusted the custody of the children, whether sons or daughters, with the women to the exclusion of men. Therefore it was inevitable that actions which relate to the female in her capacity as a female should be entrusted with the woman, and actions which relate to the male in his capacity as a male should be entrusted with the man. Since Allah (swt) created the male and the female and He knows best the situation of the man and the woman, then we must limit ourselves to the rules which He (swt) has legislated and not overstep them. This applies to whether these rules are intended solely for the men or exclusively for the women or whether they are for humans irrespective of their being men or women, because He (swt) knows best what is suitable for the human. Therefore, attempting to use the mind to deprive the woman from performing certain actions under the pretext that she has nothing to do with them, or to give her activities which are specific to men, under the assumption that this dispensation is in fairness to her and realises justice between her and the man; all of these are transgressions against the Shari’ah, a total mistake and a cause of corruption (Fasad).

The Shari’ah has made the woman a mother and a housewife. It came to her with rules relating to pregnancy, childbirth, suckling, custodianship and the waiting period (Iddah). It did not grant men any part in that because these rules relate to the woman in her capacity as a woman. Thus it placed on her the responsibility of the child in terms of pregnancy, delivery, suckling and custody. Therefore, these are her most important activities and greatest responsibilities. Hence, it can be said that the primary role of the woman is that she is a mother and housewife because it is through this action the human race survives and because she is distinguished by this from the men. Therefore, it should be clearly understood that whatever actions she is charged with and whatever responsibilities are placed on her, she should continue in her primary responsibility which is that of motherhood and the upbringing of children. That is why we find that the Shari’ah allowed the woman to break her fast in Ramadhan if she is pregnant or suckling a baby. Also, the Shari’ah exempted her from praying if she is menstruating, or is in childbirth, and prevented the man from travelling with his child from the country in which the mother resides, as long as she still has custody over the child. All of this is to facilitate the completion of her primary role, which is her being a mother and a housewife.

However, the woman's primary role as mother and housewife does not mean she is confined to this role and prevented from pursuing other activities. Rather it means that Allah (swt) has created the woman so that the man may dwell in tranquillity with her and so that He may obtain from her progeny and offspring. Allah (swt) says:

“And Allah has made for you wives of your own kind, and has made for you, from your wives, children and grandchildren” [An- Nahl: 72] And He (swt) said:

“And among his Signs is this, that He created for you wives from among yourselves, that you may find repose in them” [Ar- Rum: 21]

However, at the same time He (swt) has created her to be active in the public life as she is active in her private life. Thus, He (swt) has obliged her to carry the Call (Da'wa), seek knowledge with regards to the actions that are incumbent on her in her life, and He (swt) allowed her to trade, lease, delegate, and forbade her from lying, treachery and betrayal. Just as He (swt) has obliged, allowed and forbade the man from these things. And Allah (swt) gave her the right to work in agriculture or industry just as she practises trade. He (swt) gave her the right to form contracts, own all types of property and invest her wealth. He (swt) also gave her the right to look after her own affairs by herself, become a partner or employee, employ people, lease property and things, and undertake the rest of the societal transactions (Mu’amalat). This is due to the general import of the Legislator's speech and the absence of prohibitions specific to women. However, it is not permitted for the woman to take up positions of ruling whether as leader of a state, his Mu'awin (assistant), Wali (governor), 'Amil (Mayor) or any other activity considered as ruling. This is due to what has been narrated by Abu Bakrah that He said: When the news reached the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) that the people of Persia had appointed the daughter of Chosroes (Kisra) as queen over them He (pbuh) said: “People who appoint a woman to run their affairs shall never succeed.” This is clear in its prohibition of women assuming the position of ruling and in its censure for those who appoint a woman to run their affairs. And the person in authority (Wali al-Amr) is the ruler. Allah (swt) says:

“Oh you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and those of you who are in authority (ulu al-amr minkum)” [An- Nisa: 59]

Thus, the authority of ruling is not permitted for the women. As for positions other than ruling, the woman is allowed to undertake them. Therefore, women can be appointed to government civil-servant positions because they do not constitute ruling, rather they fall under employment. The employee is a private government worker. They are like the employee of any other individual or company. It is allowed for the woman to assume the position of judge because the judge is not a ruler but rather He settles disputes between people and informs the disputants of the binding Shari’ah rule. Therefore, the judiciary (Al-Qadha’a) can be defined as the pronouncement of the Shari’ah rule by way of compulsion. So the Qadhi is an employee and not a ruler. He is a government employee like the rest of the workers. It has been reported from 'Umar b. al-Khattab that He appointed al-Shifa - a woman from his folk - as a market judge (inspector) i.e. a judge of Hisba who passes judgement on all violations. However, the permissibility for a woman to be a judge, relates to the text of the Hadith and its applicability to the reality of the function of a judge. If the Hadith which forbids the appointment of women over peoples' affairs is applicable to the judicature, then appointing them as judges would not be permitted. If the Hadith does not apply, then it cannot be used as an evidence to prevent women from being appointed to the judicature. Looking at the Hadith, we find that the Messenger (pbuh) dispraised the people who appointed a woman over their affairs in response to the news that reached Him that the people of Persia had appointed a woman as queen. It is, therefore, a comment on a piece of news, and in a manner of a response to a question. It is specific to the topic of the report and to none other. The subject matter of the news is the ruling (Mulk) i.e. the leadership of the state. The comment was on this topic and it is specific to the issue of state leadership and whatever is related to that, which is governance (Hukm). This is from one perspective. From another angle we see that the prohibition is directed towards the general authority because it is the authority over the affairs (of people). This is what the Hadith means and this is what it indicates. As for the issue of the Judge, it is a role different to the role of the Khaleefah, or the role of the Wali. The role of the Khaleefah and the Wali is the execution of the rule directly by themselves, regardless of whether a case has been raised to them, the judgement of a Qadhi has been raised to them, or no case has been raised but they observed it as going against the Shari’ah. So the ruler judges against the transgressor without the presence of a claimant and He applies the verdict on Him.

As for the Qadhi, He cannot pass a judgement without the presence of a case, i.e. that a case is referred to Him and there are two claimants present. So He passes judgement when there is a case but He has nothing to do with it if no one initiates a legal action. In the event of looking into the case, He informs the people of the ruling of Allah (swt) with regards to the case in a manner that is binding. He has absolutely no authority of execution, except if He is appointed as judge and ruler. Then, He will execute the rules in his capacity as a ruler and pass judgement in his capacity as a judge. Thus, the reality of the judiciary is different to the reality of ruling. Therefore the Hadith does not apply to the judge. Moreover, the judiciary does not belong to authority whatsoever. The Qahdi does not have authority over any people of a country in which a Qahdi has been appointed, even over claimants. Obedience to Him is not obligatory, rather it is obligatory to implement his ruling when He passes a judgement on a case because it is the ruling of Allah and not because the Qahdi ordered it. his ruling is not considered a ruling of a judge unless He passes judgement in the judicial court. Therefore, his witnessing of an event or his hearing of it in other than the judicial court does not permit Him to pass judgement on what He has witnessed or heard as long as it did not take place in the judicial court. This differs from the ruler who must be obeyed in every situation and He does not need a specific court for the passing of a ruling. Rather He can pass judgement in his own house, street or the state capital, and in every place. Obedience to Him is obligatory. The Prophet (pbuh) said: “Whoever obeys the Ameer, He has obeyed me”. Therefore, the Hadith which prohibits the appointment of women as rulers does not in any way apply to the function of the Qahdi. So the post of judge cannot be prohibited for the woman by this Hadith. The reality of the Qahdi is that He is an employee of the ruler whom He has employed for a certain salary to do a certain job. The word 'employee' (Ajeer) is mentioned in the authentic Ahadith which include all employees for all types of jobs. Since the Messenger (pbuh) considered the Qur'anic teacher an employee, He (pbuh) said: “Indeed, the best action which you deserve a wage for is the teaching of the Qur’an.” Indeed, the Qahdi likewise is considered an employee and whatever He takes from the treasury (Bayt al-mal) is considered a wage. No one should say that the Qahdi is an assistant to the ruler and so He should be considered a participant in ruling, because the Qahdi is only an employee of the ruler and not his assistant. his function is to understand the reality of a problem between two disputants and examine the application of legal laws in the case of adopted rules, or the application of Shari’ah rules in the absence of an adoption, to whom the judiciary finds guilty or not guilty. Therefore, they are employees hired for a certain salary to do a certain job.

This is with regards to the judge and the Qahdi of Hisba. As regards the Qahdi of the court of unjust acts (Mazalim), it is not allowed for this Qahdi to be a woman. The woman is not permitted to assume the post of the judge of Mazalim because it is ruling. Its reality is the reality of ruling and the Hadith is applicable to it. This is because the unjust acts that take place via the ruler, on the people, are raised whether someone made a claim or not. The judge does not need to call in the defendant (eg an official), when someone claims a case of injustice. However, it is allowed for the judge to call Him to sit in his presence or not to call Him, because the issue is not to pronounce a verdict over a case. Rather, it is to lift the injustice that occurs from the rulers upon the people. The corresponding reality of the judgement of the Mazalim is that of ruling. Therefore it is not allowed for the woman to assume such a position.

Still remaining is the issue of the permissibility of the woman to be a member of the Majlis al-Ummah or not, in case one exists. Indeed this is unknown to some. So they say it is not permitted by comparing the Majlis al- Ummah in Islam to the parliament in democracy. The truth, is that there is a difference between parliament in the democratic system and the Majlis al- Ummah in Islam. The parliament is part of ruling because, according to democracy, it has the jurisdiction to rule since it is the parliament that elects the president and removes Him and it is the parliament which gives the cabinet the vote of confidence and takes it away, and so at once deprives it of power. The reality of the parliament is that it undertakes three functions: Firstly, it accounts the government and monitors it. Secondly, it passes laws. Thirdly, it appoints rulers and removes them from office. In terms of accounting the government and monitoring it, that is not considered part of ruling, but in terms of legislation, discharging rulers and installing them, that is considered part of governance. This is contrary to the Majlis al- Ummah. Its reality is that it accounts the ruler and monitors Him and it shows its discontent whenever required. This includes the shortcoming in looking after the affairs of the people, complacency in the application of Islam or neglecting to carry the Islamic Call (Da'wah) etc. However it does not enact laws, and appoint or depose rulers, therefore it is different from the parliament. That is why it is not allowed for the woman to be a member of parliament as long as it is considered part of ruling according to the capitalist system. The woman is allowed to be a member of the Majlis al-Ummah because it is not part of governance. However, the impermissibility of the woman to be a member of parliament does not mean she is not allowed to elect the ruler. Her being a member of parliament places her in a position of ruling i.e. one who has authority to rule, and this is not allowed due to the clear prohibition of that in the saying of the Prophet (pbuh) “People who appoint a woman to run their affairs shall never succeed.” This is different to her electing the ruler because she is not placed in a position of ruling. Rather she is given the right to elect the person who will rule over her. The Shar’a has permitted the woman to elect the ruler and to select any man for any action of ruling because it is allowed for her to give Bay’a to the Khaleefah and elect Him. It is narrated from Umm Atiyya that she said: “We gave our Bay’a to the Messenger of Allah (pbuh), so He (pbuh) recited to us “they should associate none with Allah” and He forbade us from wailing (upon the dead). A woman among us withdrew her hand saying: so and so woman has made me happy and I want to reward her. He (pbuh) said nothing, the woman went then came back”. Giving the Bay’a to the Prophet (pbuh) was not on the basis of Prophethood but an obedience to the ruler. So this Hadith shows that the woman can give Bay’a to the Khaleefah and elect Him. This is with respect to the parliament. As for the Majlis al-Ummah it is contrary to this because it is a council for consultation and the presentation of opinions and it has no authority to rule. The Majlis does not elect a ruler except if the Ummah has delegated it to do so, nor does it remove the ruler or enact laws. All of its work relates to opinions. The function of the Majlis al-Ummah is that the state refers to it to seek its opinion with regards to what it wishes to see implemented in terms of the internal policies and to account what it has undertaken of the internal and external actions. In addition, the Majlis itself will submit opinions about matters which are internal and external. It is also part of its work to give opinions with regards to candidates for the post of Khaleefah, as well as to make known their grievances concerning Walis and Mu'awins, this also constitutes putting forward an opinion. All of this falls within the presentation of opinions which point to an action. Its work also includes consultation, which the Khaleefah is not obliged to adhere to it; such as expressing its opinion concerning the rules which the Khaleefah has adopted. All of these matters are merely opinions and not ruling. Therefore its task relates only to opinions and none other.

The members of the Majlis al-Ummah are themselves representatives of the people only with respect to opinions and nothing else. They are not representatives of the people in ruling or in the appointment of a ruler except if the Ummah delegates this responsibility to them, nor does it represent the people in the removal of a ruler. Even when they show their disapproval of Walis and Mu'awins (assistants) such people are not automatically discharged because of their opinion rather the Khaleefah dismisses them according to their opinion. This is contrary to parliament where the cabinet is dissolved the moment the confidence of the parliament is withdrawn and without the need of the president to dismiss it.

As long as the members of the Majlis al-Ummah represent the people in their opinions, then the woman has the right to air her political, economic, legislative or other opinions. She also has the right to delegate anyone she wishes to put forward an opinion or she can be delegated to put forward this opinion for whom she wishes. Islam has given her the right to put forward her opinion just as the men put forward their opinions. Consultation (Shura) in Islam is the right of the man and woman without differentiation. He (swt) says:

“And consult them in the affair” [Al- Imran: 159] And He (swt) said:

“And who (conduct) their affairs by mutual consultation” [Ash- Shura: 38]

This is a general text which includes the man and the woman. The order to command good (Amr bil al-ma'ruf) and forbid the evil (Nahi 'an al-munkar) is equally obligatory upon the man and the woman. He (swt) said:

“Let there arise out of you a group of people inviting to all that is good (Islam), commanding al-Ma'ruf (good) and forbidding al-Munkar (evil)” [Al- Imran: 104]

And the Prophet (pbuh) said: “Whoever of you sees a munkar let Him change it”. This is a general text which includes the man and the woman. So accounting the rulers is obligatory upon the man and the woman. The giving of advice (Al-nasiha) has been prescribed for men and women. When the Prophet said: “The deen is to give advice (nasiha)”. It was asked “to whom O Messenger of Allah”? He replied “To Allah, his Messenger, to the rulers of the Muslims, and the Muslims at large”. He (pbuh) did not confine the giving of advice to the man. Rather the Muslim has the right to give advice to the leaders of the Muslims and the general public irrespective of whether the one who puts forward the opinion is a man or woman. Since women used to discuss with the Messenger and ask Him questions, this means that a woman has the right to discuss with the Khaleefah and put questions to Him. It has been narrated that the Messenger (pbuh) after preaching to the men on the day of Eid moved on until He came to the women, whom He preached to and admonished and warned saying: “Give charity, for verily most of you are fuel for the hellfire”, whereupon there arose from the middle ladies’ congregation, a darkcheeked woman who said “Why is that, O Messenger of Allah”? This shows that the woman discussed with the Messenger and asked Him when He said something pertaining to them. The story of Khawla bint Tha'laba when she approached the Messenger asking Him about the issue of her husband's divorce of her by way of Zihar (swearing that she is like his mother to Him). He replied that it was not in his power to do anything, so she argued with Him (pbuh). It is a well known story which Allah (swt) has alluded to in the Qur'an. Thus, He (swt) said:

“Indeed Allah has heard the statement of her that disputes with you (Oh Muhammad) concerning her husband, and complains to Allah. Allah hears the argument between you both” [Al- Mujadilah: 1]

This unambiguously shows that women discussed with the Messenger. Nothing more needs to be said about the permissibility of the woman in presenting her view in every matter and discussing it. No one doubts this matter and accordingly an (consensus) has taken place on this issue. As for the woman being allowed to delegate to anyone she wishes to air her opinion or that she can be delegated to express an opinion for whom she wishes. Nothing more really needs to be said about its permissibility since the woman can delegate in marriage, selling and renting etc, and others can delegate to her in these things. This delegation is not specific to some things to the exclusion of others but it is general to all things which includes expressing an opinion. Therefore, it is allowed for the woman to delegate to anyone she wishes to express an opinion or she herself can be delegated to, to express an opinion for whom she wishes.

Since the Majlis al-Ummah is an assembly for the airing of opinions and its members represent others in expressing opinions, it is permitted for the woman to elect and be elected in the Majlis al-Ummah, i.e. she has the right to represent others and delegate others to express opinions. Furthermore, in the thirteenth year of the Prophethood, i.e. the year in which the Prophet (pbuh) made the Hijra, He (pbuh) was met by seventy three men and two women (of the Ansar). The two women were Umm 'Umara bint Kalb, one of the women of Bani Mazin and Asma bint 'Amr b. 'Addi who was one of the women from Bani Salama. The Messenger arranged to meet them at al- 'Aqaba. So they went in the middle of the night. All of them climbed the mountain including the two women. The Messenger (pbuh) told them: “I take a pledge from you that you protect me as you would protect your women and children.” Their pledge was that they should say ‘We made the pledge (Bay’a) that we would hear and obey, in ease or difficulty, whether we liked or disliked it. And that we should say the truth wherever we may be, we should not fear, for the sake of Allah (swt), the blame of anyone. This is a political pledge and since the woman is allowed to give a political pledge then it is allowed for her to elect and be elected, because the pledge and election are of the same issue: which is, the selection of a ruler and obedience to Him. The evidence to say that the Bay’a and the election are of the same issue, is that if the Khaleefah does not receive a pledge then He cannot lawfully become Khaleefah. What makes Him Khaleefah is the pledge (Bay’a). Therefore its reality is that of electing a Khaleefah, and as an oath to hear and obey Him. It is not true to say that the Bay’a is an oath to hear and obey only, since this only applies to those who have given the pledge after the appointment of the Khaleefah. However, the initial Bay’a, is for election and then an oath to hear and obey the Khaleefah. It is stipulated that such a pledge is based on consent because it is an oath of consent. Therefore, the Bay’a and election are of the same issue. The election of someone who will represent the woman in an opinion in the Majlis al-Ummah is established by way of greater reason (Min bab awla). Since, if she is allowed to elect the Khaleefah, and He presides over the highest position of ruling, then by greater reason she is allowed to elect someone of lesser position. Therefore, it becomes clear that the woman's electing of members of the Majlis al-Ummah is permitted by the Shari’ah.

This is in terms of the indication from the second pledge of 'Aqabah, that the woman is allowed to elect others in the Majlis al-Ummah. As for its indication that others can elect her as a member of the Majlis al-Ummah, the Messenger (pbuh), after the completion of the pledge, told all the men and women “Bring forth from amongst you twelve chiefs (Naqibs) who will be responsible for their people including themselves”. This is an order of the Prophet (pbuh), to all the people, to elect from the people present. It is general, the Messenger did not specifically mention the men. Neither did He exclude the women, either from those that were electing, or from those that were being elected. The general import of a text is applied in its generality as long as there is no evidence of specification. Since the Prophet (pbuh) did not specify, then his order is inclusive of all men and women without distinction, whether they are in the process of electing or are being elected.

Therefore, the permissibility of the woman being a member of the Majlis al-Ummah and being allowed to elect its members is proven from the angle of her being a representative of others in their opinion, or herself delegating others to air an opinion. It is also established by the Hadith of the second pledge of 'Aqabah.

No one doubts that consultation (Shura) is a right of the man and the woman and that accounting the ruler is obligatory upon the man and the woman and that commanding the good (Ma'ruf) and forbidding the evil (Munkar) is compulsory upon the man and the woman. The advice (Nasiha) has been legislated for men and women, and the representation of people's views (Wakala) is permitted for the man and the woman. The woman has the right to hold and air this opinion. There is no difference whether this opinion is political, legislative or any other type of opinion. Since the activities of the Majlis al-Ummah are confined to consultation (Shura), accounting the ruler, commanding the good (Ma'ruf) and forbidding the evil (Munkar) and advice (Nasiha) to Imams of the Muslims, all of which relate to opinions and does not involve ruling. Then, this demands that there should be no doubt about the permissibility of the woman being a member of the Majlis al-Ummah or about the permissibility of the woman electing a member of the Majlis al- Ummah. Despite this some doubted the permissibility of her electing members in the Majlis al-Ummah because the Bay’a is considered an oath of hearing and obedience and not for the purpose of election. Hence, they did not find in it any evidence for election. However, since it has been established that the Majlis al-Ummah is only for the purpose of airing opinions and that the woman has the right to delegate whoever she wishes to present her opinion, then there should be no doubt over the permissibility of the woman electing members of the Majlis al-Ummah. Besides, the pledge initially is an oath of consent, and thus is considered an election of the Khaleefah by the contracting parties and not only a contract of obedience. Therefore, the oath of consent and the election are of the same issue, which is the selection of the Khaleefah. So the woman has the right to elect and select the ruler as the established Hadith of the Bay’a of the women (Bay’at al-Nisa) indicates. Hence, by greater reason, it is allowed for her to elect the members of the Majlis al-Ummah. Also, some doubt the legality of the woman being a member of the Majlis al-Ummah, because of its similarity with parliament even though it has been established that the Majlis al-Ummah is different to parliament. The Majlis al-Ummah is for the purpose of airing opinions whereas the parliament is for ruling. One does not resemble the other. Therefore, there should be no doubt as to the admissibility of the woman being a member of the Majlis al-Ummah because any doubt over whether the Majlis al-Ummah is equivalent to Parliament has been removed. Thus no doubt remains over the permissibility of the woman to be a member of the Majlis al Ummah and to elect the members of the Majlis al Ummah except for the most stubborn.