Press Response
Responding to the Writer of the Article "Hizb ut Tahrir and the Islamic Khilafah"
(Translated)

We have looked into the article written by Mr. Babker Faisal Babker titled "Hizb ut Tahrir and the Islamic Khilafah "Caliphate"" (1-2) in your newspaper Al Aamira, Issue No. 31121 dated Thursday, 09th of Dhul Qiddah 1435 AH (corresponding with 04th of September, 2014 CE), where the writer vilified Hizb ut Tahrir as he has vilified the honorable Sahaba (ra), with reference to weak or questionable sayings. We have waited a whole week for the writer to finish his article as it appeared in the newspaper since the title: (1-2) implied that there is a second part for the article. In addition, the writer assured that he will continue with his article by concluding the article with "to be continued..." but he didn't continue, rather a new article written by him covering a new topic appeared which was issued in your newspaper on Thursday, 11 September, 2014 CE. Also, the article was published on the website "Sudan Tribune" coinciding with its issuing in the newspaper.

As per our right to respond, we kindly and thankfully ask from you to publish our response in your newspaper.

We will say with full reliance on Allah (swt), The All-Mighty, The All-Wise: The writer does not know anything about Hizb ut Tahrir although he appointed himself as a judge and judged upon when the Hizb described it as not having a detailed and clear vision of how to reach a Khilafah "Caliphate" or a method to select a ruler... and we respond to the writer as follows:

Firstly: The writer does not differentiate between the method and the technique; as the method is a permanent mean, which are the Shariah rules in Islam. As for the technique, it is the temporary mean done by a certain action, and it is allowed unless it is Haram since the Shariah principle says: "The means leading to Haram is Haram", and so as the technique if it is Haram or leading to Haram then it should not be done.

As for the topic of nominating a Khalifah, Bayah is the only Shariah method that Allah (swt) has legislated in order to nominate a Khalifah in Islam. As for the technique, or techniques, to implement this Bayah differentiated and they are allowed techniques, and this is what confused the writer who considered that there is no agreed method to act upon. In addition, the writer vilifies the Prophet (saw) by saying: "The Prophet (saw) did not place a specific method to nominate the ruler, and if Abu Khalil intends the Baya'ah, then an agreed method does not exist to act upon it."

How would the Prophet (saw) neglect this and he (saw) is the one who even taught us how to enter the bathroom, so how can he not teach us how to choose a Khalifah after he (saw) passes on the Mercy of The Superior Friend (swt), and this is one of the great affairs which is the basis of the Ummah's entity and the State?!

A Hadith narrated by Muslim on the account of Abu Hurairah (ra) mentions that the Prophet (saw) says:

«كَانَتْ بَنُو إِسْرَائِيلَ تَسُوسُهُمْ الْأَنْبِيَاءُ كُلَّمَا هَلَكَ نَبِيٌّ خَلَفَهُ نَبِيٌّ وَإِنَّهُ لا نَبِيَّ بَعْدِي وَسَتَكُونُ خُلَفَاءُ تَكْثُرُ»، قَالُوا: فَمَا تَأْمُرُنَا؟ قَالَ: «فُوا بِبَيْعَةِ الْأَوَّلِ فَالْأَوَّلِ وَأَعْطُوهُمْ حَقَّهُمْ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ سَائِلُهُمْ عَمَّا اسْتَرْعَاهُمْ»

"The tribes of Israel were ruled by the Prophets, every time a Prophet deceased he was followed by another Prophet, and there will be no Prophets after me, and there will be Khulafaa (successors) and they will be many." The companions then asked, "What do you order us?" to which the Prophet (saw) replied, "Fulfill your pledge of allegiance to them one after another, and give them their rights, and truly Allah (swt) will ask them about their responsibilities." The Prophet (saw) showed that the method of choosing the Khulafaa in ruling after him (saw) is by giving Bayah (allegiance), and Abu Khalil is not the one who said it! As for the method of contracting the allegiance, it is actually a piece of information; it is a contract between the ruler and the Muslims where he should rule them according to the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of His Prophet (saw), and they should obey him in the good and bad times... As for what the writer has considered as different methods for the succession of the Khulafaa Al Rashideen after the Prophet (saw) it is, as we have explained, not being several methods, but it is one method which is giving Bayah (allegiance) by the Muslims for the Khalifah even if the techniques are different, which is also what we have explained as allowed.

The enemies of Islam always exploit this, and they refuse the Islamic ruling but they don't say that openly. They exploit such sayings which create doubt in the process of nominating the Khulafaa Al Rashideen, and using it prejudicially.

Secondly: Hizb ut Tahrir has a clear and detailed vision, not only in how to reach a Khilafah "Caliphate" or the mean of choosing a ruler, but a detailed and clear vision in everything that is related to government, politics, economy, and others for life's systems. The Hizb's seriousness shows that it is the only party that has a constitutional project derived from the Book of Allah (swt), the Sunnah of His Prophet (saw), what is concluded by the Sahaba's consensus, and the Shariah measurement based on the strength of the evidence and correct research, which is the constitutional project for the Islamic Khilafah "Caliphate" constituted from 191 Articles. I do not think that the writer read this book. In addition, the Hizb explained in its book The Institutions of State in the Khilafah "Caliphate" (In Ruling and Administration) all that the brother writer finds as problematic, especially the matter of the processing procedures for the nomination of the Khalifah and giving him Bayah (allegiance) (page 27).

Therefore, if the writer was serious and searching for the truth, he can call us to gift him this book, though he can also view it in the Hizb library via the internet.

Thirdly: To go through the history of the Sahaba and to insinuate and describe them with descriptions that don't fit them is the saying of the enemies of Islam and the Muslims. The true believer loves the Sahaba of the Messenger (saw) of Allah (swt) and does not allow a word to befall them, as they are what the Prophet (saw) said about them:

«اللَّهَ اللَّهَ فِي أَصْحَابِي اللَّهَ اللَّهَ فِي أَصْحَابِي لا تَتَّخِذُوهُمْ غَرَضًا بَعْدِي فَمَنْ أَحَبَّهُمْ فَبِحُبِّي أَحَبَّهُمْ وَمَنْ أَبْغَضَهُمْ فَبِبُغْضِي أَبْغَضَهُمْ وَمَنْ آذَاهُمْ فَقَدْ آذَانِي وَمَنْ آذَانِي فَقَدْ آذَى اللَّهَ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى وَمَنْ آذَى اللَّهَ فَيُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْخُذَهُ»

"Allah, Allah for my companions! Allah, Allah for my companions! Do not use them prejudicially after me, for those who love them, I love them, and those who hate them, with my hate I hate them, those who hurt them has hurt me, and those who hurt me has hurt Allah, All Blessings and Glory to Him, and those who hurt Allah is about to be taken by Him" (Narrated by Imam Ahmad). I hope that the writer is not one of those people, and that he asks for forgiveness from Allah (swt) and repent to Him (swt) for how he described As-Seddiq, the companion in the cave, and the Farooq, whom the Prophet (saw) said about him

«ما سلك عمر طريقاً إلا سلك الشيطان طريقاً آخر»

"Whenever Umar takes a path, Satan would take another path", may Allah (swt) be pleased with them and with all of the companions of the Messenger (saw). The description of the writer disproves Abu Bakr and Umar (ra) by saying that they clung on to the Khilafah "Caliphate": "The Ansar were despaired from Saad's inauguration after seeing Umar's and Abu Bakr's clutching [to the Khalifah position]..." Umar's (ra) saying confronts this when he talked about the Day of Al Saqeefa: "... As for what you have remembered in yourselves in goodness, then you are its people (meaning the Ansar) and the Arabs won't know this accept for a neighborhood in Quraish, they are the midmost of the Arabs in lineage and hospitality; and I have allowed for you one of these two men so give your Bayah allegiance to whoever you want. He took my hand and the hand of Abu Ubaida bin Al Jarrah who was sitting among us, and I have not hated anything from what he said expect that, as in the Name of Allah if he came forward to strike my neck, it would not bring me closer to a sin beloved to me from to conspire against the people whom among them is Abu Bakr." So, where is the clutching of Umar for the Khalifah position here?! In a valid narration from Abu Bakr's (ra) speech when he was inaugurated as Khalifah, by saying after thanking Allah (swt) and glorifying him (swt): "After this, I was inaugurated for this position and I am reluctant about it, and in Allah's Name some of you would be good enough [for this position]..." So, where is the clutching of Abu Bakr for the Khalifah position as the writer mentioned?!

Fourthly: The writer reported incorrect, actually deceptive, information about giving Bayah (allegiance) to the Khulafaa after As-Seddiq (ra), by saying: "When As-Seddiq (ra) passed away, he didn't leave the appointment of anyone to succeed after him to the majority of the Muslims or even to the people of "the solution and the contract". Instead, he recommended our master Umar in a closed book which the Muslims gave Bayah to before he passed away without them knowing what is in that book." This statement is not accurate, but rather it is a straight lie, as when Abu Bakr (ra) felt that his illness is deadly and especially when the Muslim armies were in battle with the large countries back then - the Persians and the Romans - he invited the Muslims to consult them. He stayed three months in these consultations, so when he concluded them and knew the opinions of the majority of the Muslims, he promised them (which means "nominated for them" in today's language) Umar (ra) to be the succeeding Khalifah. This promise or this nomination was not contracting Umar (ra) to the Khilafah "Caliphate" position, because the Muslims after the death of As-Seddiq (ra) went to the masjid and gave Bayah (allegiance) to Umar (ra) as the Khalifah of the Muslims, so if the case was that it was already contracted then Umar (ra) would not need the Bayah (allegiance) given to him by the Muslims, because as we mentioned no one becomes a Khalifah of the Muslims except through a Bayah (allegiance). Also, what Umar (ra) did when he was stabbed and was approaching his death was also a nomination and not a contract for the person succeeded him in Khilafah "Caliphate", and he did that after the Muslims insisted on him to choose for them. The inauguration story of our master Othman (ra) is well-known how Abdul Rahman bin Awf went to the houses of the Muslims and asked them whom they are pleased with to be the Khalifah succeeding Umar (ra), and he asked the men and women. As for the Bayah (allegiance) given to Ali (ra), it was a Bayah (allegiance) given by the majority of the Muslims in Madina and Al Kufa, and it was not under the force of the swords nor the sharp edges of spears as alleged by the writer which insinuated that Ali (ra) took this position by predominance and force without Bayah (allegiance), and we shall not discuss the topic of the Fitna that happened because it is not the topic that we are currently discussing about.

Fifthly: As for answering the writer's question in the conclusion of his article of why we did not support the IS which was announced by the Taliban in Afghanistan, and why we didn't give our Bayah (allegiance) to Mullah Umar:

it is simply because the Taliban did not announce an Islamic Khilafah "Caliphate" state, rather said it is an Afghani emirate, and there's a huge difference between them. As for Mullah Umar, he didn't announce himself to be the Khalifah of the Muslims, but as a prince of the Islamic Afghani emirate.

Upon Allah (swt) is the intended way and He (swt) guides His (swt) creation upon the straight path.

Ibrahim Othman (Abu Khalil)
Official Spokesperson of Hizb ut Tahrir
in Wilayah Sudan