I read a book of yours entitled Atheism Delusion. I thought that you were only a writer, and not a man of religion. But after taking a look at the rest of your books, I have found you to be a man of religion. Most of what I have understood from your way of thinking is that the ruler must be dispatched from God so that he can rule with justice and equity, and so that people can live prosperous lives. However, it is in complete conflict with reality. We see that there are countries who don't recognize God in the first place. Their ruler is chosen by the people; they live with justice and prosperity and do not oppress anyone. They care about human rights. Don't you see that the killing, destruction, and hunger only exists in the Muslim countries? So what is the benefit of this ruler who is dispatched by God if, within the European countries, there is the experience of people living in peace, justice, and security for example? I think they need a European ruler? Thank you.
Answer by Sayed Ahmed Al-Hasan: May the peace, mercy, and blessings of God be upon you.
May God welcome you.
In terms of rulership and the ruler: it is only a part of the Divine religious system. My books include many things, much more than just the [issues of] rulership and the ruler.
The significance of the religious and the reformational legislative role of the viceregent of God, whether he is a dispatched Prophet or Imam, is much more important than his political role, even with regard to the well-known case of the Mahdi spreading tranquility and justice on Earth. I explained it to some of the believers a few years ago. What is meant first and foremost is spreading the true religion and belief that God is satisfied with, before the earth becomes empty without it. This is more important than the other parts related to rulership and social justice.
As for the issue of the rulership and ruler: you can say very briefly that the one who should be in charge of people's blood, and the decision of war and peace, and anything else, such as the ordering of executions, must be a Divinely protected man. Otherwise, tremendous corruption and bloodshed will ensue. And many examples of corruption have came about due to democratic systems, like the second world war and what the elected American president did in Hiroshima and Nagasaki when he attacked them with nuclear bombs. And the ruling system of the United States, as well as many other countries throughout the world, claim that the United States is the best representative of the democratic system
Yet today, the whole world stands anxious and fearful of the behavior and decisions of Trump, the elected American president, which may lead to a nuclear war against North Korea and perhaps it might spread even farther. And you can imagine what could happen if Russia and China participate in this most recent American barbecue party on this earth. I think that it is unfair, immoral, illogical and unintellectual that the blood of 49 percent or less of people within a society are subject to a decision of individuals or a person that they rejected and that 51 percent or more of the society chose. This is assuming that there is 100 percent participation, and this is, of course, almost impossible to achieve, since in some cases participation can be less than 50 percent. Therefore, you can imagine the amount of oppression and unfairness when the blood and lives of 70 percent or more of people in a society are subject to the decisions of a person that only 20 percent of the people chose. And Iraq experienced this under the bitter government of Nouri Al Maliki, and hundreds of thousands of Turkmens, and also the arabs in Kirkuk, who have suffered after being being dragged into the law of the electoral majority vote to live under the shade of the Kurdish National State. This moral problem in the democratic system and democratic process is a deep-rooted one.
This is why you find that some countries have annulled the rule of execution: to solve the problem of who should be the one to represent society's decision of ending the life of a certain person. Some of them have made the king or the king’s representative become the supreme ruler over the democratic or electoral system, as is the case with the United Kingdom and some of the European and Asian countries, and Australia. And you can conduct a review of modern history, where [we find that] in 1975, the Governor-General or the representative of the Queen dismissed the prime minister of Australia from office. So regardless of these systems saying that they are secular and democratic, in reality, they borrow their system of rule from the notion of the Divine ruling system.
Thus there is the presence of supreme supervision that is unelected, which overrides the elected ruling system. As for the other matters related to ruling, I will say very briefly that the purpose for establishing a country and government within human society is for achieving a prosperous society, and at the very least, solidarity for every individual within society according to the social solidarity principle; imposing taxes; and bolstering the authority of the country through some common natural resources, while guaranteeing freedom and individual rights. In order to achieve progress and prosperity, there are critical matters that must be taken into account, such as the organization of work, specialization, competency, and integrity. It is just like the saying: "Give your bread to the baker." So organized work that takes the consequences into account is productive. It has nothing to do with disbelief or belief, or a particular religion. Therefore, on this level, we are not saying that a Divine vicegerent must take over the job or that a Divine leader must supervise it in order for there to be productivity, progress, and relative social justice. So it is incorrect to direct an argument to us on that level.
The believers in this call emerged with demonstrations in Baghdad's Tahrir Square and the rest of the cities within Iraq, and have supported the request for an independent technocracy to administer the affairs of the country’s economy. Regarding independent technocracy, it is not directed toward one person who is specialized, but rather, toward one who is both competent and specialized, who proves his competence on a practical level.
This is a very brief summary of our point of view and Islam's point of view regarding rulership and rule. And it is a deep-seated point of view that is based on intellectual, philosophical and moral principles, before religious and legislative ones.