/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2021/01/8ad6f03a006b1788cf136b7e572d2201.jpg)
Haram to topple a govt? Zahid's religious adviser begs to differ, cites democracy
After an ulama declared that attempts to unseat a just government were forbidden (haram) in defence of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s administration, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s religious adviser has offered a markedly different interpretation.
Khairuddin Aman Razali argued that changing governments through democratic processes does not violate Islamic principles...
After an ulama declared that attempts to unseat a just government were forbidden (haram) in defence of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s administration, Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s religious adviser has offered a markedly different interpretation.
Khairuddin Aman Razali argued that changing governments through democratic processes does not violate Islamic principles.
Zahid is no stranger to the mechanics of political realignments and changes of government.
He played a pivotal role in the collapse of the Pakatan Harapan administration in 2020 and later helped end Bersatu president Muhyiddin Yassin’s tenure as prime minister.
Today, he finds himself at the helm of an Umno locked in an uneasy federal alliance with Anwar-led Harapan, even as the two political camps find themselves on opposing sides in state elections.
Anwar himself is hardly unfamiliar with attempts to change governments through political manoeuvring.
In 2008, he spearheaded what became known as the Sept 16 plan, seeking to persuade enough lawmakers from the ruling coalition to defect and bring about a change of government.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2023/10/b62aec217b05664f121c78a50808fc0d.jpg "khairuddin aman razali 311023")
In a Facebook post this evening, Khairuddin said the mandate given to any government formed through elections expires when Parliament or a state legislative assembly is dissolved.
Consequently, he noted that campaigning by rival parties or the opposition against an incumbent government cannot be equated with a rebellion such as that of the Khawarij during the era of the fourth caliph, Ali Abi Talib, but is an exercise grounded in Islamic law (syariah), conducted through the modern democratic process of choosing a head of government.
“Campaigning efforts must not be labelled as an attempt to ‘topple the government’ unlawfully under Islamic principles and consequently declared haram, unless they are accompanied by an armed rebellion against the country's head of state and rulers, namely the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the rulers of the respective states,” he added.
Khairuddin was responding to ulama Syeikh Wazir Che Awang Al-Makki, an adviser to the Kelantan Association of Pondok Institutions, who likened such efforts to the conduct of the Khawarij, a group that opposed rulers during the early days of Islam.
Democratic process
Taking the argument further, Zahid’s adviser said a government headed by a prime minister, menteri besar or chief minister could also be removed through a vote of no confidence in Parliament or a state legislative assembly, with the matter subsequently referred to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the respective state rulers or the governor.
“This, too, is a democratic process that is consistent with Islamic principles, and is not a Khawarij-style rebellion or an attempt to topple the government that should be declared haram.
“Indeed, criticism of the incumbent government by opposition parties, as well as campaigning to change the government through democratic means, falls under the concept of ‘amar ma'ruf nahi mungkar’ (enjoining good and forbidding evil), provided it does not involve taking up arms in rebellion, as established in a hadith narrated by Muslim,” he added.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/09/cab67f3175b548769a3cb7af2cf554fa.jpg "parlimen parliament malaysia generic 040926")
On the question of what constitutes a just government, Khairuddin said the assessment was inherently subjective and could be made in the context of democratic competition, where political parties put forward better policies or alternatives to measures they consider detrimental to the people.
“Every government action must be objectively assessed against the Islamic yardsticks of justice and oppression.
“The principle of ‘amar ma'ruf nahi mungkar’ (enjoining what is good and forbidding what is wrong) should be applied accordingly through democratic means, rather than making blanket declarations that a particular government is either just or oppressive.
“Today, all political parties in the country are enjoying the benefits of being in government, whether at the federal or state level.
“A party may be in the opposition at the federal level but forms the government in a state. This is how democracy allows governments to change hands,” he added.
Uphold Islamic values
At the same time, Khairuddin urged politicians to uphold Islamic values and ethical conduct, cautioning against insults and abuse, the deliberate cultivation of negative perceptions about individuals, the sowing of discord, and the circulation of fabricated stories and slander.
Such conduct, he said, would only deepen divisions within society and undermine Islamic brotherhood, all in the pursuit of political power.
“These are the early signs of Khawarij-like behaviour in politics, which must always be called out.
“We must nurture democracy through checks and balances on the government by the people.
“Supporting what is good and reprimanding what is wrong are consistent with the concept of ‘amar ma'ruf nahi mungkar’ in Islamic politics,” he added.
It is an encouraging development that scholars of Islam are publicly debating the relationship between Islamic teachings and modern parliamentary democracy. The disagreement between the Kelantan religious scholar and Zahid Hamidi's religious adviser raises two questions deserving wider discussion. First, what does Islamic jurisprudence actually say about democracy? The Quran emphasises justice, consultation (shura) and responsibility in government. But does it prescribe a particular system of government, or leave the selection of rulers to human institutions and historical circumstances? Second, who selects our rulers? Is it God, the rakyat, religious scholars, hereditary rulers, or some combination of these authorities? The distinction between divine sovereignty and political legitimacy deserves careful examination. Believing that all events occur according to God's will is not the same as claiming that a particular government enjoys divine approval or cannot legitimately be replaced. Islamic history itself demonstrates that rulers came to power through consultation, nomination, hereditary succession and sometimes force. There has never been one universally accepted Islamic procedure for selecting governments. In Malaysia, however, the constitutional arrangements are established. The rakyat elects representatives, governments must command legislative confidence, and the constitutional monarch exercises the functions assigned by the Federal Constitution. Religious scholars are entitled to discuss the moral obligations of rulers and citizens. But their interpretations should not be confused with constitutional authority. Perhaps this public disagreement offers an opportunity for Malaysia's universities and Islamic institutions to examine the relationship between religious authority, popular sovereignty and parliamentary democracy. Ultimately, the question is not whether citizens may peacefully replace a government. The Constitution already provides for that possibility. The more important question is whether religious interpretations should ever be used to deny the rakyat their constitutional right to choose their government.
Instead of focussing on the country’s economic issues, here we have some highly educated advice on how to create more problems. If we keep voting these mediocre leaders the only ones who will prosper are the politicians
It is not haram actually to topple a government which fails to champion Islam. Sheraton Move is a good example.
Report this comment
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.