وکالت اسلامی یا غیر اسلامی ؟

zsheikh

MPA (400+ posts)
law_answer_3_xlarge.jpeg


مرے ذھن میں ایک سوال ہے کے آیا وکالت کا پیشہ اسلامی ہے یا غیر اسلامی ہے . مرے خیال سے اسلام میں اس کا کوئی تصور نہیں ہے بلکہ شاید غیر اسلامی ہے . کیوں جب دو فریقن کوئی مقدمہ عدالت میں لے جاتے ہیں تو جو مالدار ہوتا ہے وہ مہنگا وکیل کرلیتا ہے جو مضبوط دلائل دے کر مقدمہ جیت جاتا ہے چاہے وہ مجرم یا غلط ہی کیوں نہ ہو . اور مظلوم کو انصاف نہیں ملتا کیونکے قاضی (جج) دلائل کی بنیاد پر فیصلہ کرتا ہے اور قانون اندھا ہوتا ہے کے مقولے کے مطابق نہ تحقیق کرتا ہے اور نہ ہی حالات کا ادراک رکھتا ہے . جبکے اسلامی تاریخ میں دیکھیں تو معلوم ہوتا ہے تو لوگ اپنا مقدمہ براہراست قاضی کے پاس لیجاتے تھے اور قاضی ، داروغہ کی مدد سے معاملے کی تحقیق کرتا اور بغیر کسی وکیل کے مقدمہ کا فیصلہ سناتا تھا .



وکالت کی ابتدا کہاں سے ہوتی ہے اور قرآن اور حدیث اس بارے میں کیا کہتی ہے ؟ شکریہ .
 
Last edited by a moderator:

indigo

Siasat.pk - Blogger
The Quran (42:38) says: amruhum shura baynahum (the affairs of the Muslims are run on the basis of their consultation).

Justice system is a part of a Ruling system.... And Ruling system according to Quran is formed by mutual consultation of People.....




Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Whosoever pledges allegiance to anyone without the collective consent of the Muslims presents himself for the death sentence.2

It is true that, in Muslim history, monarchy and dictatorship have often been accepted forms of government. Some people also believe that the head of government should be an appointee of God Himself. However, the principle the Quran spells out is very clear. What this principle entails in terms of its nature and foundation has been explained very aptly by a well-known Muslim scholar of our times, Mawlana Abu al-Ala Mawdudi. He says:

First of all, people whose interests and rights are directly affected by collective decisions should have the absolute right to express their opinions. They should be fully informed of how their matters are being dealt with, and they should be granted the full right to criticize those in charge of their matters for any mistakes or flaws. They should also have the right to change their leaders if they do not see any effectiveness in the efforts for their reform. Making people conform to collective decisions by stifling their voice, shackling their hands and keeping them in the dark is downright dishonesty, which no intellectually honest person can consider as compliance with the directive of amruhum shura baynahum.

The second thing that needs to be understood is that the appointment of the person responsible for the collective affairs of the Muslims should be with the free will of people. Support gained through coercion, intimidation, jobbery, bribery, deception or misrepresentation does not reflect free will. The rightful leader of the people is not someone who attains this position by hook or by crook, but someone whom they choose of their own accord.

The third point is that representatives of people involved in consultation with the head of the state should be appointed on the basis of the genuine trust of people. Obviously, those who have attained this position on the basis of coercion, bribes, lies and deception can never be deemed as worthy of this trust.
The fourth point pertains to freedom of expression for peoples representatives to present their opinions correctly and honestly in accordance with their understanding and conscience. If this aspect is missing and the representatives are bound by any fear, greed or group affiliation, the consequence will be dishonesty and betrayal rather than conformity to the principle of amruhum shura baynahum.

Finally, the unanimous or majority verdict of the consultative body should be accepted. The reason for this principle is that, if any person or group is given the authority to violate the collective decision, the whole process of consultation becomes meaningless. Almighty Allah does not say: In their matters, Muslims are consulted. Instead, He says: Their matters are based on their consultation. Compliance with this directive does not take effect by mere consultation. Compliance here requires that, in the consultation, whatever is decided by unanimous or majority verdict become binding.3



2. Islamic law as understood, interpreted and applied in one of the major Sunni schools of thought. The Ḥanafī school is named after the Iraqi legal expert Abū Ḥanīfah (d. 767).
3. Bukhārī, No: 6442.
 
Last edited:

Ahssan Khan

MPA (400+ posts)
Aaj kal k wakeel jaisay hein, sab ko pata hai...
meray khayaal mein her buray insan ko bachanay k liye wakeel moujood hai, laikin ghareeb ki koi nahin sunta...
jis k pass pasiay hein wo Aitazaz Ahsan ko wakeel ker leta hai, or jiskay pass nahin hein wo bechara phans jata hai...
ye wakeel kitna loot rahay hein ye ksisi aisay shakhs se poochain jiska koi case adalat men ho!

 
Most of the matter have nothing to do with daleel , they were judged on proofs


مرے ذھن میں ایک سوال ہے کے آیا وکالت کا پیشہ اسلامی ہے یا غیر اسلامی ہے . مرے خیال سے اسلام میں اس کا کوئی تصور نہیں ہے بلکہ شاید غیر اسلامی ہے . کیوں جب دو فریقن کوئی مقدمہ عدالت میں لے جاتے ہیں تو جو مالدار ہوتا ہے وہ مہنگا وکیل کرلیتا ہے جو مضبوط دلائل دے کر مقدمہ جیت جاتا ہے چاہے وہ مجرم یا غلط ہی کیوں نہ ہو . اور مظلوم کو انصاف نہیں ملتا کیونکے قاضی (جج) دلائل کی بنیاد پر فیصلہ کرتا ہے اور قانون اندھا ہوتا ہے کے مقولے کے مطابق نہ تحقیق کرتا ہے اور نہ ہی حالات کا ادراک رکھتا ہے . جبکے اسلامی تاریخ میں دیکھیں تو معلوم ہوتا ہے تو لوگ اپنا مقدمہ براہراست قاضی کے پاس لیجاتے تھے اور قاضی ، داروغہ کی مدد سے معاملے کی تحقیق کرتا اور بغیر کسی وکیل کے مقدمہ کا فیصلہ سناتا تھا .



وکالت کی ابتدا کہاں سے ہوتی ہے اور قرآن اور حدیث اس بارے میں کیا کہتی ہے ؟ شکریہ .
 

mriteri

Politcal Worker (100+ posts)
totally Un Islamic knowing that fact your client is sin full culprit and you are trying to make fool court to protect him.......at the day of Judgement there would be no Wakeel...only you and Allah ..that's it ....