A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ON SAHIFAT AL-MADINA AND THE PRINCIPLES OF A MODERN CONSTITUTION VIS-À-VIS THE POSITION OF POLITICS UNDER ISLAMIC LAW

Abstract

Many countries of the modern world are guided by a single document referred to as a constitution. Those without a single document as a Constitution still claimed to have an unwritten one. Thus, Countries without a Constitution are frowned at and regarded as undemocratic and Countries that are inclining towards Islamic law are viewed as having a system that is not compatible with Democracy. Some writers even went as far as claiming that Islam has nothing to do with politics and that there is no any element of politics in Islam. To them, Madina was never a State and Sahifat al-Madina was not a constitution, but a mere document of agreement. This article seeks to answer the questions as to whether politics is part of Islam or not and whether Sahifat al-Madina was really a constitution or a mere document of agreement. All these will be done through content analysis of some Qur’anic verses as well as the Hadith of the Prophet and analyzing the modern constitutional principles against the provision of Sahifat Al-Madina to see whether such principles were contained therein or not. In conclusion the findings in this study clearly shows that the message of Islam can only be sustained through political regime as such from the cited authorities, it is obvious that politics is part and parcel of Islam and Sahifat al-Madina was clearly a Constitution.