سیرت نبوی کی روشنی میں بغاوت (خروج) سے متعلق احکامات کا تحقیقی جائزہ

Islam orders to obey the ruler and not to indulge in activities that may cause disruption & instability of an Islamic state. This research discusses rules & regulations based on sīrah about rebellion (khurūj), and relevant topics from Islamic Jurisprudence. The basic question of this research is whether revolt against the ruler is permissible and what would be the punishment? This research elaborates four types of rebellion. Rulings of Muslim scholars regarding rebellion are subjected to the different positions of rulers. According to all school of thoughts the khurūj is not permitted if the ruler is lawful and serving his community with justice. In contrary, there is difference of opinions about the tyrannous and iniquitous ruler. This article concluded that majority of Muslim Scholars do not permit khurūj in any case, some others laid down very strict conditions in this regard.

Issues of Peace and Governance: A Case Study of Contemporary Pakistan

Research studies suggest that societies moving from traditional-authoritarian order towards rational-democratic order should promote rational-inclusive ideological discourse, promote politicians who are favorably disposed towards rational- democratic values and capacity building at local level—incubation/transformation. However, governing elite in developing societies, such as Pakistan, adopts either exclusive ideology or remain indifferent; temper with evolutionary political process and prefers centralization instead of building rational capacity at local level. As a result, society remains stuck in transition with hybrid regimes. Parallel to hybridism are fluctuations in state’s effectiveness, political instability and violence. Periodic fluctuations indicate the presence of underpinning structural factors in this regard. Thus, structural constraints faced by governing elite in state-society consolidation and relationship between hybridism and instability and violence need to be understood. The study is based on the position that hybrid regimes are locked in transition. As this study addresses ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions, therefore interpretive ‘empathetic enquiry’ has been employed. Within hybridism as deductive framework, induction across time and space has been employed in order to find out common pattern and specific variations. Governing elite is the product of structure, hence possesses both authoritarian inclination and conviction in the legitimacy of rational-democratic order. The absence of requisites of rational-democratic order provides justification for the authoritarianix mind-set. However, requirements of democratic legitimacy prompt them to continue democratization. But the task of adjustment between irreconcilable features compels them to adopt bounded rationality—decision-making which accounts only for immediate changing context. Thus, governing elite adapt politico-ideological posture according to the changing context—internal political situation and global dynamics. Besides, due to authoritarian-libertarian paradox, governing elite neither adopts consistent coercion nor complete accommodation. Thus, grievances of less- empowered groups due to nation-state discourse keeps on simmering, high expectations of potentially mobilized groups remain un-institutionalized, and greed of privileged groups unaddressed. In addition to these, temporary motivation and limited coercion without internalization of rational-democratic values make state and society fluctuating. Welfare-state discourse and holistic analysis of society by intelligentsia and political leadership can lead to the consolidation of stable as well as peaceful relations.