When Sheikh Hasina declared that she was going to run majority-minority relations according to the Medina Charter, many thought it was a shift away from “secularism” for political convenience.
The charter was promulgated by the Prophet of Islam (pbuh) in the sixth century and is considered the first written document describing governance particularly of multi-culturalism. But the charter is much more than that as any reading shows.
It conceptualised political identity, prescribed conflict management methods, ways to tackle enemies, and lays out the role and rights of minorities and the majority as well.
It is a tool for confidence building and crisis management. The charter has its roots in ancient history, but the lessons appear applicable even today as Hasina is saying.
***
The Medina Charter was a practical document about political and social management by the ruling group which was facing threats from without and within. It dealt with the issue of rights for all and threat to the security of rising Islam.
It came soon after the Battle of Badr and in a period of transition as the society moved to a post-pastoral economy. The forces of Islam -- as a political group -- had gained much, and were in a state of consolidation, but still in danger.
The charter principles are:
• That Islam (Believers) is the primary legitimate ruling force in Medina.
• It is in charge of fighting the enemies and maintaining peace among the infighting tribes in Medina and providing protection to all.
• No mercy was to be shown to the enemies of Islam such as the Quraysh of Mecca.
• Subject to certain conditions and loyalty, all minorities including the Jews would be treated fairly and as equals with the Believers.
***
In the charter the concept of Ummah (nation/people) is very important. But the Ummah is the conglomerate and is not a declaration of blanket acceptance of all residents of Medina as its part.
The charter says: “This is a document governing relations between the Believers ie Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib (Medina) and those who followed them and worked hard with them. They form one nation -- Ummah.”
The enemies of Ummah are clearly described just as the friends are. And loyalty is a value that is cherished above all.
***
Three clauses of the charter are important about the management of Medina:
• Everyone (individual) will have his share (of treatment) in accordance with what party he belongs to.
• Individuals must benefit or suffer for the good or bad deed of the group they belong to.
• Without such a rule, party affiliations and discipline cannot be maintained.
So, party loyalty for the Believers is of prime importance, for without it Medina will be threatened. And those who are not Believers are acceptable to the Ummah only if they are loyal.
“The Jews, including their freedmen, have the same standing, as other parties to the Pact, as long as they are loyal to the Pact. Loyalty is a protection against treachery.
Anyone who acts loyally or otherwise does it for his own good (or loss).”
Statecraft in the Medina Charter is about building a society based on mutual benefit and strict codes of loyalty.
***
The problem of misuse of power is also discussed in the charter. It states: “This document will not (be employed to) protect one who is unjust or commits a crime (against other parties of the Pact).”
The Medina Charter was a practical document about political and social management by the ruling group which was facing threats from without and within. It dealt with the issue of rights for all and threat to the security of rising Islam
In other words, identity with the ruling group can’t be used as a tool for personal gain or inflicting harm on others.
This is the most sensitive part of the documents, as it challenges the twin concepts of loyalty co-existing with security and it’s this aspect of the Charter that brings the greatest challenge to contemporary rulers implementing the Medina Charter.
***
The Quraysh tribe had both Believers -- émigrés to Medina -- and those who were in Mecca and had thrown out the Believers.
Thus identifying and dealing with the genesis of enmity and loyalty was very important, as it was critical to the survival of Islam.
Survival in Medina meant the survival of Islam, and so no chances were taken about the management of threat and the biggest issue was unquestionable loyalty.
But discrimination was denied. The charter states: “No Jew will be wronged for being a Jew.”
It also says that those Jews who follow the Believers will be helped and will be treated with equality. This is what is understood as the even-handed treatment of minorities. But it’s also qualified by another principle.
No un-Believer will intervene in favour of a Quraysh, because the Quraysh having declared war are the enemy.
So, forgiveness of enemies has no space in the charter.
***
The Medina Charter is not just about protection of minorities, but protection of Medina and its guardians, the Believers also. They were in charge of security and ensuring peace within.
The minorities were welcome to live there as equals subject to certain conditions which included proof of loyalty and fighting wars alongside them.
There is no space for dissent and disagreement in the charter and the final interpretation of the charter lay with the Believers. But it was a civil document, and consultation was important.
Most importantly, the principle that governed Medina is stated: “Believers are all friends to each other to the exclusion of all others.”
***
How does that relate to the present Awami League rule and its attitude towards governance and other players in the state?
Two elements are very emphatic in the charter. One is the element about identity -- the Believer -- and the other is the element about loyalty.
These are the non-consultative parts of the charter and to a significant way are the principles that define the functioning of the AL too. To the AL, the right to rule is not only about the principles of pluralism but the principles of legitimacy.
It’s rooted primarily in its foundational role in 1971, when it believed in Bangladesh. What follows afterwards is a continuation.
If there was a violent interruption in 1975, it would have come from the political infidels, and that is why the Jamaat-BNP becomes a “spiritual enemy” and opposing it goes beyond the political.
The task that the AL has chosen for itself is to be the saviour of Bangladesh, and it’s here that lies the key to the understanding of both what is good and bad about AL.
It would seem that this perception doesn’t lie in the constitution alone, but in the AL’s self-belief of being responsible for the well-being of Bangladesh as well.
It’s not a political governance issue only; it’s about being on a chosen path to be traversed as a party chosen by history.
Its pedigree goes back all the way to the date of its founding in 1949 through the war of 1971 and today.
Reading the constitution is not enough to understand the AL; one must read the Medina Charter too.
The constitution is the framework of the state, AL’s first document, but its spirit is in the other document, the Medina Charter.