The Council of the Ummah has mandatory powers and they are:

The Khaleefah has to consult the Council and the Council has the right to advise Him in the practical matters and actions that do not require investigation and scrutiny such as the matters of ruling, education, health, economy, trading, industry, farming and the like. The opinion of the Council in these matters is binding.

In the intellectual matters that require investigation and scrutiny, the technical and the financial matters together with the affairs of the armed forces and foreign policy, the Khaleefah has the right to refer to the Council for consultation and acquainting of its opinion. However the opinion of the Council is not binding.

The Khaleefah has the right to refer to the Council the laws and rules which He wants to adopt. The Muslim members of the Council have the right to debate them and voice their opinions regarding those rules. However, their opinion is not binding.

The Council of the Ummah reserves the right to hold the rulers accountable on all matters that take place effectively within the State, whether these are related to domestic affairs, foreign affairs, financial affairs or military matters. The opinion of the Council is binding if the majority’s opinion in such matters is binding, and it is not binding if the majority’s opinion in such matters is not binding.

If the Council and the Khaleefah differed about the legitimacy of an action that had been already executed, the matter should be referred to the court of Mazaalim to settle the question. Its verdict on the matter is binding.

The Council of the Ummah reserves the right to express discontent towards the Wulah or the ‘Aamileen. Its opinion in such case would be binding and the Khaleefah should dismiss them at once.

The Muslim members of the Council have the right to restrict the nomination of candidates for the Khilafah. Their opinion in such a matter is binding, and candidates other than those put forward by the Council should accordingly not be considered.

These are the mandatory powers of the Council of the Ummah.

The first article is divided into two sections. The evidence for section (a) is derived from Allah’s (swt) saying; “And do consult them in the matter;” [TMQ Al-Imran: 159] And His (swt) saying; “And their matter is in consultation between them.” [TMQ Ash-Shura: 38]

So He (swt) made the Shura general in every matter, for He (swt) says; “In the matter,” [TMQ Al-Imran: 159] Where the term Al-Amr (the matter) it is a generic noun and defined by ‘Al’ (the). He (swt) says; “And their matter” [TMQ Ash-Shura: 38]

Where the term Amruhum (their matter) is generic noun and defined by genetive and both terms are ‘Aam (general) so they include everything. However, this ‘Aamm term has been specified in matters other than the Ahkam Shar’iah. This is because the divine rules are revelation from Allah (swt) and there is no scope for the people’s opinion regarding matters brought down by revelation. For Allah (swt) alone is the Commander and the Legislator.

As for the evidence that the opinion of the council of the Ummah in the practical actions and matters, which do not require scrutiny and investigation is binding, this is derived from the acceptance of Rasool Allah (pbuh) of the opinion of the majority to go outside Madinah to confront the army of the Mushrikeen in the battle of Uhud. This is despite that his (pbuh) opinion and that of the senior Sahabah was to remain in Madinah and not to go out. It is also taken from his (pbuh) saying to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar “You (both) agreed on a Mashura, I would not disagree with you.” As for the evidence for section (b), this is the choice made by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) for the location of the Battle of Badr, based on the proposal of Al-Habab bin Al-Munthir, without consulting his companions over the matter to seek their opinion, let alone committing himself with that proposal. Thus the intellectual and the technical matters together with the finance, army and foreign affairs are referred to the opinions of the experts and the professionals without giving any weight to the opinion of the people whether they were minority or majority.

The fact that the Shura is over the Mubah things is a Qareenah (indication) that it is Mandoob (recommended). Indeed the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) used to refer to the honourable Sahabah over many matters and on many occasions to consult them and seek their opinion. Ahmad has reported from Anas that; “ The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) consulted (people) when He heard the news of the advent of Abu Sufyan.” Ahmad narrated from Anas, who said; “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) consulted when He went to Badr. Abu Bakr expressed his opinion to him. Then He consulted ‘Umar who expressed to Him his opinion. Then He consulted them, so some of the Ansar said; ‘The Prophet of Allah wants you to speak O folk of Al-Ansar.’ Some of the Ansar said; ‘Do you consult us O Prophet of Allah? We do not say as the children of Israel said to Musa (as); ‘You and your Lord go and fight, but we will stay at home’, but, by He who sent you with the Truth, if you were to take us to Bark al- Ghimaad, we would follow you.’” Regarding the captives of Badr, Ahmad reported on the authority of ‘Umar “...the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) consulted Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, and Ali...” Ibnu Ishaq reported from Az-Zuhri, who said; “When hardship increased on the people, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) sent to Uyayna bin Husn and Al-Harith bin Awf Al-Murri, the two leaders of Ghatafan, and He (proposed to) give them the third of the Madinah produce on condition that they return together with their folk, leaving (the fight against) Him and his companions. Agreement was reached between them to the point that they wrote that in a letter, without calling the witnesses and without the decision of concluding the peace except the negotiation over that. When the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) wanted to conclude that He sent to Sa’d bin Mu’az and Sa’d bin Ubadah. He mentioned the matter to them and consulted them...” Also, the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) consulted his companions in the Battle of Uhud, whether to leave Madinah or stay in it. This is in addition to other consultations. Likewise Abu Bakr used to refer to the leaders of Al-Muhajireen and Al-Ansar and to their scholars to consult them. He consulted them over the issue of fighting against the apostates, those who refused to pay the Zakat and in the matter of invading the Romans besides other matters. ‘Umar and the Khulafaa’ after him, also used to refer to the people for their consultation and opinion.

People sometimes used opinions based on their own initiative, to advise the Khaleefah over some matters. This happened with Abu Bakr after He became Khaleefah and wanted to dispatch Usama with his army, when most of the Arabs apostasised from Islam. ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, Abu ‘Ubaydah, Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas and Sai’d bin Zaid called on Him to advise Him not to send Usama, but He rejected their request. These incidents practiced by the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and the guided Khulafaa’ after Him occurred in front of the Sahabah. They indicate that Shura and referring to the people to consult them and seeking their opinion is Mandoobin Thereupon, it is Mandoob for the Khaleefah to return to the Council of the Ummah to consult it and seek its opinion over the various matters and actions.

When the Khaleefah refers to the Council of the Ummah to seek its opinion over the practical matters and the actions, He must commit himself to the opinion of the majority. This is based on the compliance of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) with the opinion of the majority in the Battle of Uhud, though his opinion and that of the Sahabah was different to that of the majority. He  gave up his opinion and that of the Sahabah and complied with the opinion of the majority. This indicates that in such an incident, which is the type of action that does not need study and scrutiny, the opinion of the majority of Muslims is adopted. It is also taken from the saying of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) to Abu Bakr and ‘Umar as narrated by Ahmad from Ibnu Ghanam al-Asha’ri “Had you agreed together in a Mashura I would not disagree with you.” The Mashura in this Hadith is itself Shura, which covers consultation in any practical matter or an action.

This is with regard to the part (a) from the first section. As for part (b) if the Khaleefah refers to the Council to seek its opinion in the matters of this part, the opinion of the council is not binding. Originally, the Khaleefah takes the opinion of the scholars, experts and professionals in the matters of this part as it occurred with the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) when He adopted the opinion of Al-Habab bin Al-Munthir regarding the selection of the place of the Battle of Badr. It was narrated in the Seerah of Ibnu Hisham that,

“When He (pbuh) camped at the near side of the water of Badr, Al- Habab bin Al-Munthir was not happy with this place. He said to the Messenger (pbuh); ‘O Messenger of Allah! Did Allah make you camp in this place where we can’t depart from it, or is it the opinion, war and strategy?’ He (pbuh) said; ‘It is rather the opinion, war and strategy.’ Al-Habab bin Al-Munthir said; ‘O Messenger of Allah, this is not the (right) place. Move the people till we come to the side of the water near to the people (enemy), we camp there, then we seep away the water from the other part, we build a basin on top of it, we fill it with water. Then we fight against the people where we drink and they do not.’ The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said; ‘You gave the (right) opinion.’ So the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) and the Muslims stood up and walked till they reached the near side of the water from the enemy and camped there. Then He (pbuh) ordered that the water be seeped away which was done. He  built a basin on top of the seeped wells, where it it was filled with water and they threw in their (water) pots.” So the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) agreed with the opinion of al-Habab and followed it.

In this incident, which has to do with the opinion, war and strategy, the views of the people have no weight in taking the decision. Rather the view of the expert is what is considered. Similar to this are the technical matters and the thoughts that require study and scrutiny, together with the definitions. In all of such matters, reference is made to the experts and professionals and not to the ordinary peoples’ opinion. There is no weight to the majority for such matters, but rather to those with knowledge, experience and specialisation.

This also applies to the financial matters, because the Shar’a has determined the types of funds which must be collected, and the areas over which they need to be spent. The Shar’a has also determined the cases in which taxes are imposed, therefore there is no point in seeking the opinion of the people in the collection and allocation of the funds. Similar to this is the army, the Shari’ah has left to the Khaleefah the right of managing the army’s affairs, and it determined the rules of Jihad. There is no validity in the opinion of the people over matters decided by the Shar’a. This also applies to the relationship of the State with other States, because this is of the thought that requires study and deep insight and is related to Jihad. Furthermore, it is a part of the opinion, war and strategy. Therefore, there is no point in the opinion of the people in this matter whether it is the majority or minority. However, the Khaleefah is allowed to present these matters to the Council of the Ummah for its consultation and opinion, because such presentation is of the Mubah, and the opinion of the Council in these matters is not binding as in the incident of Badr.

With regard to the second section, although what the Khaleefah wants to adopt of rules and Canons is of his duties, and the opinion of the council regarding these matters is not binding, the Khaleefah has the right to refer to the Council of the Ummah to ascertain their opinion over the divine rules and canons which He wants to adopt. This is similar to what ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab (rta) did when He referred to the Muslims over the divine rules, which the Sahabah did not object to, as in the incident of the conquered lands of Iraq, when the Muslims asked Him to divide the lands amongst the fighters who opened them. Hence ‘Umar asked the people, but his opinion settled on keeping the land with its landlords on condition that they pay a known Kharaj over it in addition to paying the jizyah over their persons. The reference of ‘Umar and Abu Bakr before Him to the Sahabah for their opinion over the divine rules without an objection from the Sahabah to this, indicates their Ijmaa’ (consensus). This is evidence that the Khaleefah has the right to refer to the Muslims to seek their opinion over the divine rules when He does not find texts about them in the Kitab of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger, or He finds them difficult to understand or when He wants to adopt them. Their opinion in all of these matters is not binding to the Khaleefah.

The non-Muslim members of the Council do not have the right to look into what the Khaleefah wants to adopt of rules and canons because of their disbelief in Islam. Their right is in voicing their opinion of the injustice of the rulers towards them, and not in expressing of their opinion over the divine rules and canons.

With regard to the third section, its evidence is the general meaning of the texts related to bringing the rulers to task. Ahmad narrated from Ibnu ‘Umar, who said the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said; “There will be ‘Umara over you who order you of things they do not do. Whoever believed them in their lies and helped them in their injustice He would not belong to me nor I belong to him, and He will not join me on the Hawdh (basin).” Ahmad narrated from Abu Said al-Khudri, who said; “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said; “...the best of Jihad is (to say) a word of truth before an oppressor ruler.” Al-Haakim narrated from Jaber from the Prophet (pbuh) who said; “The master of martyrs is Hamza bin ‘Abdul-Muttalib and a man who stood to an oppressor ruler where He ordered Him and forbade Him so He (the ruler) killed him.” Muslim narrated on the authority of Awf bin Malik al-Ashja’i that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said; “Beware! Whoever gets a Waali over Him and He saw Him (the Waali) commit some sin (disobedience to Allah), He has to hate that sin but must not withdraw his hand from obedience.” Muslim narrated from Umm Salamah that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) said; “There will be Ameers Appointed over you, you recognise some of what they do and deny some. Whoever recognised He is absolved from blame. Whoever disapproved (of their bad deeds) He is safe. But whoever consented and followed them (he is doomed).” These texts are general in their wording and indicate that accounting is over any action. When the Sahabah opposed the Messenger (pbuh) over the Hudaibiyah treaty contract, and they strongly contested with him, He (pbuh) did not rebuke them for their disagreement. He (pbuh) rather rejected their opinion and concluded the peace contract, because what He did was revelation from Allah (swt) and there is no weight for the people’s opinion in such matters. He (pbuh) rebuked them because they did not obey his order when He asked them to slaughter the sacrificed animals (Al-Hadi) and shave their heads and break their Ihram. The Messenger (pbuh) did not also rebuke al-Habab bin Al-Munthir in Badr when He objected to the place of camping chosen by the Messenger (pbuh), rather He (pbuh) followed his opinion. This accounting by the Council to the Khaleefah and other assistants, governors and ‘A’mils would be over an action which has been actually executed whether this action disagreed with the divine rule, was wrong or harmful to Muslims, or was unjust or complacent toward the citizens in looking after their affairs. The Khaleefah must respond to this accounting and the objections by showing his view and evidence regarding the words, actions and tasks He undertook so that the Council can be assured of the good performance, the sincerity and honesty of the Khaleefah. If however the Council does not accept the view of the Khaleefah and rejects his argument, this must be examined. If this matter was of the issues over which the majority opinion is binding then the opinion of the Council is binding, otherwise it would not be.

It is not correct to ask; “What is the value of accounting the Khaleefah when He is not obliged to act according to this accounting?” This is because accounting is a divine rule that has to be performed, and it is a duty of sufficiency. Furthermore the nature of accounting is that it reveals information about the opinion, and clarifies it. It also warns the public opinion and arouses it, for the public opinion is more powerful than the armies, and the rulers everywhere fear it. Therefore, accounting is of great value.

If those who account differed with the rulers over any matter from the legal point of view, the matter is referred to the court of unjust acts (Al- Mazaalim) by a request from the Council, due to what Allah (swt) says; “O you who believe obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from amongst you. If you disputed over a matter refer it to Allah and the Messenger.” [TMQ An-Nisa’a: 59]

This means that if the Muslims dispute with the people of authority over a matter, they should refer it to Allah and to the Messenger, that is to arbitrate with the Shar’a. This means to refer to Judiciary, that is to the court of unjust acts and its opinion is binding.

With regards to the fourth section, its evidence is that the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) removed al-’Ala’a bin Al-Hadhrami, his ‘Aamil over Bahrain, because the delegate of ‘Abd Qais complained about Him to the Messenger (pbuh). Ibnu Sa’d narrated on the authority of Muhammad bin ‘Umar:

“That the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) wrote to al-Ala’a bin Al-Hadhrami to come to Him with twenty men from ‘Abd Qais. He reached Him with twenty men headed by ‘Abdullah bin Awf al-Ashajj, and appointed after Him Al-Munthir bin Sawa. The delegate complained of al-Ala’a Al-Hadhrami so the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) removed Him and appointed Iban bin Said bin Al-’Aass and said to him: ‘Take care of ‘Abd Qais and respect their chiefs.’” Also ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab removed Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas from the Wilayah just because of the complaint of the people against him, and He said; “I did not remove Him because of deficiency or treason”, This indicates that the people of the Wilayah have the right to express their anger and discontent of their Wulah and Ameers, and the Khaleefah thus has to remove them. Likewise, the Council of the Ummah is allowed, as a representative of all Muslims in the State, to express its anger and discontent of the Wulah and ‘Aamils and the Khaleefah has to remove them immediately.

With regards to the fifth section, the proof is that the Muslims asked ‘Umar, when He was stabbed and was close to death, to appoint somebody after him, but He rejected their request. They repeated the request, so He nominated six persons. This was an Ijma’a Sakooti (consent by silence), which is evidence that Muslim members of the Council of the Ummah have the right to shortlist the nominees for the post of Khilafah, and their opinion in this matter is binding. It was proved that ‘Umar assigned fifty men to watch the six men He nominated, and He ordered them to kill anyone of them who opposed the chosen successor. He also assigned to the six, three days, a matter which indicates obligation. As for non-Muslim members, they have no right in shortlisting the nominees, because the Bay’ah is specific to Muslims.