The Qadhi al-Mazaalim has the mandatory power to remove any ruler or civil servant, and He also has the right to remove the Khaleefah.

The Qadhi al-Mazaalim has the right to remove the rulers, for the ruler is appointed by a contract, known as the contract of assignment which is also called the contract of appointment (Taqleed). The Khaleefah has the right of the Wilayah that is the ruling, and He has the right of appointment, which is the assignment, and the appointment can only be done with clear wording. Thus the removal of the ruler appointed by the Khaleefah would be a termination of that contract, and the Khaleefah undoubtedly reserves that right. This is because the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) appointed the Wulah and removed them. The Khulafaa’ Ar-Rashidoon also appointed the Wulah and removed them; the Khaleefah could also delegate to those whom He appointed the right to appoint and remove. However, the court of Mazaalim does not have the right to remove the rulers on behalf of the Khaleefah, for it does not act on his behalf in appointing and removal. it rather acts on his behalf in looking into the Mazaalim. So if the presence of that ruler in his Wilayah was a Mazlema, the court has the right to remove that Mazlema i.e. it has the right to remove that ruler from office. Therefore, its power to remove the ruler is not done on behalf of the Khaleefah, but merely to remove the Mazlema. So the one whom it judges to be removed should be removed, even if the Khaleefah does not agree with the judgement. This is because the removal of that ruler would be the removal of a Mazlema, and this applies to everyone, including the Khaleefah, for the judgement of the judge applies to everyone. As for its power to remove the Khaleefah, this would also be by a judgement aimed at removing a Mazlema. This is because if the Khaleefah were in a situation that necessitates his removal, or in a situation as a result of which He should be removed, then his stay in office would be a Mazlema. It is the court of Mazaalim that judges the removal of Mazaalim, so it would order his removal. Therefore, the judgement of the court of Mazaalim to remove the Khaleefah would be a judgement aimed at removing a Mazlema.

The court of Mazaalim has the power to look into any Mazlema, whether the Mazlema were perpetrated by government employees, or related to a contradiction of the Shar’a by the Khaleefah, or related to the meaning of a legislative text in the constitution, the canons or the various Shari’ah rules adopted by the Khaleefah, or related to the imposing of a tax, or any other matter.

This is because the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) refused to fix the prices when the Sahabah requested Him to do so after the prices had soared, and He (pbuh) considered price fixing as a Mazlema. He (pbuh) also considered the illegal arrangements of the peoples’ access to irrigation as a Mazlema. This proves that if the action of the ruler contradicted the truth (Haqq), or violated the Shari’ah rules, it would be considered a Mazlema. The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) was a ruler over the Muslims and their Head of State.

Furthermore, if any action that is part of government business, performed by any member of the government, was in contradiction with the truth (Haqq), or if it violated the Shari’ah rules, it would be considered a Mazlema. This is because that person would be representative to the Khaleefah, acting on his behalf in the task assigned to Him in the government structure.

Therefore, the Hadith about pricing indicates that the offence committed by the Khaleefah is a Mazlema, and it is the court of justice that has the power to look into the Mazaalim. With regards to examining a text in the constitution or the canon, the constitution is the basic law and the canon is the decree of the Sultan. So examining that is examining the decree of the Sultan, which is also included in the Hadith about pricing, for it would be like examining the Khaleefah’s actions. Furthermore, Allah (swt) says; “If you dispute about something refer it to Allah and the Messenger” [TMQ An- Nisa’a: 59],

i.e. if you disputed with the people in authority about a matter. If this dispute were about an article in the constitution or an article in the canon of the law, then it would be a dispute between the subjects and those in authority on a rule of Shari’ah, which must be referred to Allah and His Messenger. This would mean referring it to the court of Mazaalim, i.e. to the judgement of Allah and His Messenger (pbuh).

As for the mandatory power given to the judge of Mazaalim to look into the imposing of a tax, this is derived from the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) where He said; “And I hope to meet Allah Azza wa-Jall without having anyone claiming a Mazlema against me, whether in blood or money.” If the Khaleefah took money from the subjects unlawfully, it would be a Mazlema; and taking money from the subjects that is not approved by the Shar’a is a Mazlema. Therefore, the court of Mazaalim has the right to investigate taxes for it is money taken from the subjects. Its investigation of tax affairs would be with the aim of ruling whether that tax is lawfully obliged by Shar’a on the Muslims, such as the money taken to feed the needy, which would not be a Mazlema; or whether that tax is not obliged by the Shar’a, such as the monies taken to build a dam that is not considered essential, which would therefore be a Mazlema that has to be removed. This is why the court of Mazaalim has the power to examine the taxes.

In the judiciary of Mazaalim, the court sitting is optional, and the summons of the defendant is not necessary, nor is the presence of a plaintiff. The court of Mazaalim has the right to look into a Mazlema even if nobody filed a claim. This is with regards to any Mazlema related to the people in the government structure, the Khaleefah’s violation of the Shari’ah rules, the meaning of any legislative text, the constitution or the canons adopted by the Khaleefah, the imposing of any tax, or related to the State’s oppression of its citizens and seizure (properties) from them by force, its transgression in terms of the collected properties (from them) or reducing the salaries of the employees and the army or delaying their payment.

This is because the evidence that confirms the need for a judicial court to look into a case does not apply to the court of Mazaalim for it is not always necessary to have a plaintiff. The court of Mazaalim looks into the Mazlema even if nobody filed a claim. It is also not necessary to summon the defendant, because it examines the Mazlema, without the need of his attendance. Therefore, the evidence regarding the necessity of a judicial court does not apply. This is due to what Abu Dawood and Ahmed narrated from ‘Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, He said; “The Messenger of Allah (pbuh) ordered that ‘the two disputing parties sit before the judge”, and his (pbuh) saying to Ali (rta); “If the two disputing parties sat before you.” Therefore, the court of Mazaalim reserves the right to look into the Mazlema as it occurs without any restrictions such as time, place or court sitting. However, due to the standing of this court, as far as its mandatory power are concerned, it has always been surrounded by the elements of prestige and grandeur. In the times of the Sultans in Egypt and Ash-Sham, the Council of the Sultan, where the Mazaalim used to be dealt with, used to be known as the Dar al-’Adl (House of Justice), where the Sultan used to appoint deputies to act on his behalf, and the Qudhah (Judges) and the Fuqahah (Jurists) also used to attend. Al-Maqreezi mentioned in his book entitled, Al-Sulook Ila Ma’arifati Douwal Al-Mulook (The way to know the States of the kings), that the Sultan Al-Malik Al-Salih Ayyub appointed deputies to act on his behalf in the Dar al-Adal. They used to sit there to remove the Mazaalim, and to gather the witnesses, Qudhah and the Fuqahah. Therefore, there is no harm if the court of Mazaalim had a splendid house, for this would be Mubah, especially if this reflected the might of justice.