Muhammad Haniff Hassan

Civil Disobedience in Islam, written by Muhammad Haniff Hassan (2018) provides an analysis of opposing arguments that either support or condemn political dissent. Hassan defines civil disobedience as a pacifist movement against an authority that breaks the law and that is orchestrated for the purpose of producing a change within the governing institution that has been judged corrupt or unjust. The primary debates are centered around khurūj, maslahah-mafsadah, and claims of ijmā`. In this essay, we summarize Hassan’s findings and provide a brief comment about the scope and limits of his work. Khurūj is the act of rejection or malalignment with an authority figure or ruler. Maslahah-mafsadah is the societal balance between benefits (maslahah) and harm (mafsadah). The claim of ijmā` is the concept that if an idea, law, or norm is agreed upon by everyone or reaches consensus, then it is considered of similar importance to scripture and tradition. Arguments against civil disobedience have a significant amount of scriptural evidence drawn to support this perspective. However, many scholars have concluded that a large majority of scripture within the Qur’ān and Hadīths cannot be argued as definitive evidence and taken for what it says, rather most tend to be nondefinitive scripture and reliant on the interpretations of the words and context of the situation. The issue of khurūj emphasizes this stance, as the act of khurūj, is completely reliant on the context and perspectives of the individual/society.  Khurūj against a just and fair leader is never permissible, however khurūj against Read more