Seeking judgement from non-Islamic courts

ʿAlqamah ibn ʿAlāthah

ʿAlqamah ibn ʿAlāthah embraced Islam during the Conquest of Makkah and witnessed the Battle of Ḥunayn in 8 AH.

One of his relatives, who had opposed the Prophet (ﷺ), was Abū Āmir al-Rāhib. The Prophet (ﷺ) used to refer to him as Abū Āmir al-Fāsiq.

When the Prophet (ﷺ) conquered Makkah, Abū Āmir fled to Ta'if, then to Damascus, where he eventually died. During the caliphate of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, as reported in al-Bidāyah wa’l-Nihāyah, ʿAlqamah ibn ʿAlāthah traveled to Damascus to claim the inheritance left by Abū Āmir.

ʿAlqamah and another man named Kinanah disputed over the inheritance, so they brought the matter to court, where the judge was Caesar.

Caesar favored the inheritance to be given to Kinanah over ʿAlqamah. This shows that it is permissible to seek one’s rights through a Taghut if no other lawful option is available.

قَالَ ابْنُ إسْحَاقَ: وَحَدَّثَنِي جَعْفَرُ بْنُ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي الْحَكَمِ، وَكَانَ قَدْ أَدْرَكَ وسَمِعَ، وَكَانَ رَاوِيَةً: أَنَّ أَبَا عَامِرٍ أَتَى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حين قَدِمَ الْمَدِينَةَ، قَبْلَ أَنْ يَخْرُجَ إلَى مَكَّةَ فَقَالَ: مَا هَذَا الدِّينُ الَّذِي جئتَ بِهِ؟ فَقَالَ: "جِئْتُ بِالْحَنِيفِيَّةِ دِينِ إبْرَاهِيمَ"، قَالَ: فَأَنَا عَلَيْهَا، فَقَالَ لَهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: "إنَّكَ لستَ عَلَيْهَا"، قَالَ، بَلَى، قَالَ: إنَّكَ أَدَخَلْتَ يَا مُحَمَّدُ فِي الْحَنِيفِيَّةِ مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهَا، قَالَ: "مَا فعلتُ، وَلَكِنِّي جِئْتُ بِهَا بَيْضَاءَ نَقِيَّةً"، قَالَ: الْكَاذِبُ أَمَاتَهُ اللَّهُ طَرِيدًا غَرِيبًا وَحِيدًا -يُعَرِّضُ بِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ- أَيْ أَنَّكَ جئتَ بِهَا كَذَلِكَ. قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: "أَجَلْ، فَمَنْ كَذَبَ فَفَعَلَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى ذَلِكَ بِهِ"، فَكَانَ هُوَ ذَلِكَ عَدُوَّ اللَّهِ، خَرَجَ إلَى مَكَّةَ، فَلَمَّا افْتَتَحَ رسولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مكةَ خَرَجَ إلَى الطَّائِفِ. فَلَمَّا أَسْلَمَ أَهْلُ الطَّائِفِ لَحِقَ بالشام. فمات بها طريدًا غريبًا وحيدًا. وَكَانَ قَدْ خَرَجَ مَعَهُ عَلْقمة بْنُ عُلاثة بْنِ عَوْفِ بْنِ الأحْوص بْنِ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ كِلَابٍ، وَكِنَانَةُ بْنُ عَبْدِ يالِيلَ بْنِ عَمْرِو بْنِ عُمير الثَّقَفِيُّ، فَلَمَّا مَاتَ اخْتَصَمَا فِي مِيرَاثِهِ إلَى قَيْصَرَ، صَاحِبِ الرُّومِ. فَقَالَ قَيْصَرُ: يَرِثُ أهلُ الْمَدَرِ أهلَ الْمَدَرِ١، وَيَرِثُ أهلُ الوَبْرِ أهلَ الْوَبَرِ٢، فَوَرِثَهُ كِنَانَةُ بْنُ عَبْدِ ياليل بالمدر دون علْقمة
[سيرة ابن هشام - الجزء ٢ - الصفحة ١٦٧]

Ibn Hisham mentioned: Ibn Ishaq said: Jaʿfar ibn ʿAbdullah ibn Abī al-Ḥakam, who had lived through and heard these events, narrated that Abū ʿĀmir came to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) when he had arrived in Madinah, before he set out for Makkah. He asked: “What is this religion that you have brought?” The Prophet (ﷺ) replied: “I have come with the Ḥanīfiyyah, the religion of Ibrahim.” Abū ʿĀmir said: “I oppose it.” The Prophet (ﷺ) said: “You are not truly opposing it.” He insisted: “Yes, I am. O Muhammad, you have introduced into the Ḥanīfiyyah things that do not belong to it.” The Prophet (ﷺ) replied: “I have not; rather, I have brought it pure and undefiled.” Abū ʿĀmir al-Kadhab (the liar), was doomed by Allah to die as an outcast, alone and in exile—he had opposed the Messenger (ﷺ). He then went to Makkah. When the Prophet (ﷺ) conquered Makkah, he proceeded to Ta’if, and after the people of Ta’if accepted Islam, he fled to ash-Shaam (Syria), where he died as an outcast, alone. Alongside him were ʿAlqamah ibn ʿAlāthah ibn ʿAwf ibn al-Aḥwāṣ ibn Jaʿfar ibn Kilāb, and Kinanah ibn ʿAbd Yalīl ibn ʿAmr ibn ʿUmayr al-Thaqafī. When Abū ʿĀmir died, they disputed his inheritance and brought the matter to Caesar, the ruler of the Romans. Caesar ruled: “The people of pasture inherit from the people of pasture, and the people of desert inherit from the people of desert.” Thus, Kinanah ibn ʿAbd Yalīl, being of the pasture (al-madr), inherited the estate, and ʿAlqamah, being of the desert (al-wabr), did not inherit. [Seerah of Ibn Hisham - Volume 2 - Page 167]

This story shows us that seeking judgement from the Taghut is not always considered an act of major shirk.

It might be that a Muslim needs to get his rights back and does not find any other option than to seek judgement from a Taghut.

Who could deny that pursuing one’s rightful claims is permissible? Not a single scholar among the Salaf ever reproached ʿAlqamah ibn ʿAlāthah for seeking judgment from Caesar.

Hence, no one possesses the authority to censure anyone who seeks justice from a non-Islamic court, particularly when there exists no possibility of an Islamic ruling.

Justice can be given even in non-Islamic courts. Have you not seen the that Najashi was just towards the Muslims before he converted and was a Christian ruler? Have you not seen the judge who freed Yusuf 'alayhi salam from prison after he judged Yusuf to be innocent from the accusations?

Though some might believe it to be rare that a non-Islamic court will be just, it would be inaccurate to say they can never judge justly.

Imam Shafi'i

(قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ): فَقَالَ لِي بَعْضُ النَّاسِ: فَإِنَّكَ إذَا أَبَيْت الْحُكْمَ بَيْنَهُمْ رَجَعُوا إلَى حُكَّامِهِمْ فَحَكَمُوا بَيْنَهُمْ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ عِنْدَكَ (قَالَ الشَّافِعِيُّ): فَقُلْت لَهُ: وَأَنَا إذَا أَبَيْت الْحُكْمَ فَحَكَمَ حَاكِمُهُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَلَمْ أَكُنْ أَنَا حَاكِمًا فَمَا أَنَا مِنْ حُكْمِ حُكَّامِهِمْ أَتَرَى تَرْكِي أَنْ أَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ فِي دِرْهَمٍ لَوْ تَظَالَمُوا فِيهِ وَقَدْ أَعْلَمْتُكَ مَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِنَبِيِّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - مِنْ الْخِيَارِ فِي الْحُكْمِ بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ التَّرْكِ لَهُمْ وَمَا أَوْجَدْتُكَ مِنْ الدَّلَائِلِ عَلَى أَنَّ الْخِيَارَ ثَابِتٌ بِأَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ - صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ - وَلَا مَنْ جَاءَ بَعْدَهُ مِنْ أَئِمَّةِ الْهُدَى أَوْ تَرَى تَرْكِي الْحُكْمَ بَيْنَهُمْ أَعْظَمَ أَمْ تَرْكَهُمْ عَلَى الشِّرْكِ بِاَللَّهِ تَبَارَكَ وَتَعَالَى؟ فَإِنْ قُلْت فَقَدْ أَذِنَ اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ بِأَخْذِ الْجِزْيَةِ مِنْهُمْ وَقَدْ عَلِمَ أَنَّهُمْ مُقِيمُونَ عَلَى الشِّرْكِ بِهِ مَعُونَةً لِأَهْلِ دَيْنِهِ فَإِقْرَارُهُمْ عَلَى مَا هُوَ أَقَلُّ مِنْ الشِّرْكِ أَحْرَى أَنْ لَا يَعْرِضَ فِي نَفْسِك مِنْهُ شَيْءٌ إذَا أَقْرَرْنَاهُمْ عَلَى أَعْظَمِ الْأُمُورِ فَأَصْغَرُهَا أَقَلُّ مِنْ أَعْظَمِهَا
[الأم – المجلد ٦ – الصفحة ١٥٢]

Imam Shafi'i said: "Some people said to me: 'If you refuse to judge between them (the Dhimmīs), they will turn to their own judges who will rule unjustly.' I replied: 'If I refuse to judge, and their judge rules unjustly between them while I am not the one judging then I bear no responsibility for their judge’s ruling. [...] Or do you consider my refusal to judge them a greater sin than leaving them be while they're associating partners with Allāh? If you say, ‘But Allāh permitted taking jizyah from them, knowing they persist in shirk while aiding His religion’, then allowing them to continue in what is less than shirk is even more permissible! If we tolerate them in the greatest matter (shirk), then the smaller matters are certainly below that.' [Al-Umm - Volume 6 - Page 152]

Imam Shafi'i stated that if a Muslim judge were to decline judging between Christians and Jews, consequently bringing their cases before their own judges, this would be permissible.

He further explained that their seeking judgment from one another is not in itself an act of shirk, and thus tolerating it poses no problem — especially since they are already tolerated despite their belief in associating partners with Allah.

This shows us that Imam Shafi'i did not view seeking judgement from non-Islamic laws to be an act of apostasy.

Imam Tabari

القول في تأويل قوله: {أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ يَعْلَمُ اللَّهُ مَا فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ وَعِظْهُمْ وَقُلْ لَهُمْ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَوْلا بَلِيغًا (٦٣) }
قال أبو جعفر: يعني جل ثناؤه بقوله:"أولئك"، هؤلاء المنافقون الذين وصفت لك، يا محمد، صفتهم ="يعلم الله ما في قلوبهم" في احتكامهم إلى الطاغوت، وتركهم الاحتكام إليك، وصدودهم عنك = من النفاق والزيغ، (١) وإن حلفوا بالله: ما أردنا إلا إحسانًا وتوفيقًا ="فأعرض عنهم وعظهم"، يقول: فدعهم فلا تعاقبهم في أبدانهم وأجسامهم، ولكن عظهم بتخويفك إياهم بأسَ الله أن يحلّ بهم، وعقوبته أن تنزل بدارهم، وحذِّرهم من مكروهِ ما هم عليه من الشك في أمر الله وأمر رسوله =،"وقل لهم في أنفسهم قولا بليغًا"، يقول: مرهم باتقاء الله والتصديق به وبرسوله ووعده ووعيده.
[تفسير الطبري – سورة النساء آية ٦٣]

Imam Tabari said: Interpretation of the verse: {They are those whose hearts Allah knows. So turn away from them, but admonish them, and speak to them about themselves with threatening words} By His words “They”, the Exalted and Glorious means these hypocrites whose traits I have described to you, O Muhammad. {Allah knows what is in their hearts}—regarding their seeking judgment from the Taghut, their refusal to seek judgment from you, and their turning away from you—out of hypocrisy and deviation, even if they swear by Allah, saying: “We only intended goodness and reconciliation.” {So turn away from them and admonish them}—meaning: leave them, do not punish their bodies and persons, but instead admonish them by warning them of Allah’s punishment descending upon them and His retribution overtaking their dwellings. Warn them of the evil consequence of persisting in their doubt concerning Allah and His Messenger. {And speak to them about themselves with far-reaching words}—meaning: command them to fear Allah, to believe in Him and in His Messenger, and in His promise and His threat. [Tafsir al-Tabari - Surah al-Nisaa verse 63]

The verse is talking about the hypocrites who would seek judgement from the Taghut. Imam Tabari explains that their action would not been considered an act of major shirk, since Allah said that they should been warned and not punished for such action.

If seeking judgement from the Taghut was clear shirk, then the advice would not have been to merely warn those who practise it.

So clearly seeking judgement from the Taghut was not considered an act of major shirk at all. However, it was something that could indicate someone's hypocrisy, though not a definitive sign like practising major shirk.

Ibn Abi Zamanin

﴿فَأَعْرض عَنْهُم﴾ فَلَا تقتلهم (ل ٦٨) مَا جعلُوا يظهرون الْإِيمَان ﴿وَعِظْهُمْ وَقُلْ لَهُمْ فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ قَوْلا بليغا﴾ يَقُولُ لَهُم: إِن أظهرتم مَا فِي قُلُوبكُمْ قتلتكم. [آيَة ٦٤ - ٦٥]
[تفسير القرآن العزيز لابن أبي زمنين – سورة النساء آية ٦٣]

Ibn Abi Zamanin said: "(So turn away from them.)—meaning: So do not kill them — for they appear believers outwardly. {And admonish them and say to them concerning themselves a far-reaching word}—meaning: say to them 'If you reveal what is in your hearts, I will kill you' [Verses 64–65]" [Tafsir Al-Quran of Ibn Abi Zamanin - Surah al-Nisaa verse 63]

These verses are regarding the action Islamic rulers must take concerning those who seek judgement from the Taghut.

Allah says that those who seek judgement from the Taghut should not be punished. He says this because such action does not constitute major shirk, if it was, then the situation would have been much different.

Ibn Abi Zamanin explains that those who seek judgement from the Taghut are still Muslims. Meaning they did not commit any major shirk by participating in that.