Freedom of speech under Islamic Law According to the Western legal standards, freedom of expression or speech means the

lack of limitation upon the ability of individuals or groups to communicate their ideas, subject to the understanding that they do not in turn force other into listening or that they do not assault other rights crucial to the dignity of individuals.1 Freedom to criticize is recognized in the Quran to the extent to which citizens are allowed to monitor the government activity by means of advice and constructive criticism. It also included the refusal to obey the government if it is guilty of violating the law.2 Muaradah is a vital principle of the Islamic government system, which entitles the people to tell the truth and expose wrongdoing (al-amar bil maruf wal-nahy an al-munkar) even when this principle contradicting the ruling authorities. This is also known as hisbah. In the Al-Quran, it is already discussed that this principle is being an integral part and it is the obligation of the Muslim faith. In Al-Quran also stated that every citizen is permitted to criticize and denounce wrongdoing either on the part of a government leader, a fellow citizen, or indeed anyone who is involved in a crime.3 It is reported that Umar ibn Al-Khatab was critical of some of the clauses of the agreement of Hudaybiyyah and Quraysh of Mecca which he felt were disadvantageous to the Muslims. Umar consulted with Abu Bakar on this matter but he still does not satisfied and later he went to express his criticize view to the Prophet s.a.w. The Prophet s.a.w listen to his criticize and give a response to the criticism.4 In the first speech of Abu Bakars election to office is reported that the have said: O people, I have been given the authority over you, but I am not the best of you. If I do well, help me and if I do wrong, set me right. These show that the Prophet s.a.w. needs to request the constructive criticism from people to the government and to encourage people to stay aware over the activities of their political leaders. Besides, it is also shown that selfcriticism is not only good for healthy growth, but it is also crucial aspect of responsible government. In another report stated that Umar says It would be to no good if the people did not remind us so and it would be to no good if we did not listen to them. By this quotation

http://www.reviewofreligions.org/2342/freedom-of-conscience-and-expression-in-islam/

2 3

Kamali, M.H. (1998) Freedom of Expression in Islam Kamali, M.H. (1998) Freedom of Expression in Islam 4 Para 2 pg 50 of freedom of expression in islam

showing that, the constructive criticism give advantages for people to develop their skills and also become a good leader. In the time of Abu Bakar and Umar bin Al-Khattab, they recognized the freedom to criticize to government leaders. The fact is shown that, when they heard the criticism from the citizen, they usually respond to it. Based on another example of muaradah, during AlKhulafa Al-Rashidin concluded that Islam allows the citizen to monitor the activities of the head of state, state officials in respect of all that they do, and all that they might neglect doing. Muhammad Khidr al-Husayn saw that Islam made freedom to criticize as an obligation of the community in order to monitor the conduct of the leader and his officials to fix up those who diverge. Besides, these rule to aware those who might be disregarding the obligations which they are entrusted. Muaradah cannot be happened unless there is a freedom of speech. Freedom of opinion cannot operate in a system of government which does not safeguard constitutional liberties. The opposition must not take the right to be criticized as advantages for the sake of the opposition. They also cannot take it as to institutionalize opposition in the form that is known, for examples in the current political parties. An opposition party is often devoted to opposition for its endurance, and this fact tends to inspire criticism that verges on imbalance. In one of Hadith instructs the Muslim as follows Rather make up your minds for yourselves and if peoples do something good, do it too, but if they do something unjust, do not do it yourselves. By this Hadith, it shows that sense of individual obligation is a paramount to the appropriate exercise of muaradah. The success of criticizes either in writing or oral lies in the sincerity of the writer. According to another Hadith stated that, every one of you is a shepherd who is responsible for (that which is in his custody). Meaning that, every person has the right to criticize, no one is beyond criticism and all criticism ought to take as nasihah. Freedom to criticize must not as a platform to separate from each other, confuse or self-aggrandisement but this freedom should serve as a method to find the certainty and to obtain for the right way of conduct so that it give interest to the whole of the community. Besides, freedom to criticise must not be based on suspicion as stated in Al-Quran and Sunnah which instructs us to avoid satisfaction in both suspicion and doubt. In order to make sure the validity of a given criticism, there are three circumstances to be satisfied. The first one is, it is essential to establish the truths and determine the ground on which criticism is based. It is found in Al-Quran where it is said, If a transgressor comes to you with any news ascertain the truth, lest you harm people unwittingly and then regret what you have done (Al-Hujurat, 49:6). By this verse, it shows us that Allah s.w.t

necessitates us to examine first the facts before getting into any decision which may otherwise prove to be untruthful and disappointing. In Al-Hujurat 29:12 asked the believers to avoid much suspicion, for some of suspicion is sinful. Therefore, doubt over the sayings and conduct of others which is not verified by evidence should be evaded. The text does not hinder all suspicion, thus suspicion which is based on appropriate or reasonable grounds may be adequate for criticism. The circumstance for defining the grounds of criticism is that they must be within the capacity of the investigators. The second circumstance in order to validate in is given criticism is that the critic must be persuaded of the moral uprightness of his opinion. If a person has faith that what he says is the truth he must not say it, otherwise he is guilty of either hypocrisy or a lie which is both is prohibited by Islam. In Al-Quran stated that the hypocrites will be in the lowest reaches of hell and refrain from telling lies. However, if the person has faith in what he is going to tell to be the right one in expressing a critical opinion, and yet the opposite is found to be the case, then he is not blamed. The consequences is same for the one who has believes himself in founding the grounds pertaining to the object of his critique, but in doing so reaches the wrong conclusion. It can be supported by the Hadith which is saying that, the person who knowingly argues what is false shall remain afflicted with the wrath of God until he ceases and desist from it. It can be assumed by the Hadith is that a person who did not know that he was engaged in a wrong cause is not to be taken to task. Lastly, a circumstance that taking into consideration is to regulate the validity given criticism is that the criticism must be equivalent to its object. Meaning that, the word used in conveying the criticism and the method should suit with the occasion. It must not be too harsh or too feeble but must polite and effective. Does single criticism would be sufficient rather than repeated and sustained criticism? In general principles, perseverance is acceptable especially when the critique is a courteous request for what is considered to be good and useful. When the criticism is pointed to the part which is conflicting to the Islamic morals, persistence is suggested until the criticism succeeds. In supporting this point, it can be included the Hadith which says that, if there is an evil being committed and there is someone who sees that, firstly, he should be change it by his hand, secondly, he should criticize the evil with his words, thirdly, he should denounce the evil with his heart, this being the weakest form of faith. The meaning of the Hadith that had been stated, if he unable to change by hand, he can use second way which is change it by his word. If he also unable to change it, he can use last way which is denounces the evil of his heart and this is the weakest form of faith.