Milliylashtirish — Kapitalistik tizimning amaliyotlaridan biri bo‘lib, davlat jamoat manfaatini ko‘rib, bu mulkka egalik qilish zarur deb hisoblasa, asli shaxslarga tegishli bo‘lgan mulkni davlat mulkiga o‘tkazishdir. Davlat milliylashtirishni amalga oshirishga majbur emas; balki xohlasa milliylashtirishi, xohlasa milliylashtirmasdan mulkni avvalgi holatida qoldirishi mumkin. Bu xulq jamoat mulki va davlat mulki haqidagi munosabatdan farq qiladi, ular Islom qoidalariga ko‘ra mulkning tabiati va tavsifiga muvofiq bo‘lib, davlatning ko‘rsatmasidan qat’i nazar shunday hisoblanadi. Shuning uchun mulkning haqiqati tekshirilishi kerak: agar unda barcha musulmonlarning haqqi bo‘lsa, u holda u davlat mulki bo‘ladi va davlat unga egalik qilishi lozim. Ammo agar barcha musulmonlarning unda hech qanday haqqi bo‘lmasa, u holda u shaxsiy mulk bo‘lib qoladi va davlat unga egalik qilmasligi kerak. Agar mulk jamoat manfaatlari yoki ma’danlarga tegishli bo‘lsa, yoki uning tabiati shaxsiy mulkka aylanishiga yo‘l qo‘ymasa, u tabiiy ravishda jamoat mulkiga aylanadi va davlat uni shaxsiy mulk sifatida saqlab qolishi mumkin emas. Agar bunday mulk jamoat mulki toifasiga kirmasa, u shaxsiy mulk bo‘lib qolishi kerak va davlat uni umuman milliylashtira olmaydi, shuningdek egasining roziligisiz unga egalik qila olmaydi, faqat egasi uni boshqa har qanday shaxsga sotgandek davlatga sotishga rozi bo‘lsa va davlat uni har qanday shaxs sotib olgandek sotib olsa, bundan mustasno. Shunday qilib, davlat jamoat manfaati bahonasida shaxslarning mulkini zo‘rlik bilan egallay olmaydi, hatto uning narxini to‘lagan taqdirda ham. Buning sababi shuki, shaxslarning mulkiga hurmat qilinishi va himoya qilinishi lozim, va hatto davlat bo‘lsa ham, unga nisbatan tajovuz qilishga hech kimga ruxsat berilmaydi. Agar bu sodir bo‘lganida, bunday tajovuz shikoyat qilinishi mumkin bo‘lgan, ya’ni har bir mulk egasi uni Mahkamat al-Mazolim (nohaq ishlar sudi)ga taqdim etishi, uning shikoyati ko‘rib chiqilishi va nohaq ish bartaraf etilishi mumkin bo‘lgan holat hisoblanardi. Chunki xalifaning hech kimning ixtiyoridagi narsani, faqat ma’lum va tasdiqlangan haq asosida olishdan boshqa yo‘l bilan olishga haqqi yo‘q. Davlat ham ommaviy yoki davlat mulkining biror qismini jamoat manfaati bahonasida biror shaxsning qo‘lida saqlab turishga haqli emas, chunki mulklarning manfaati Shar’at tomonidan belgilab qo‘yilgan, u ommaviy mulk, davlat mulki va shaxsiy mulkni alohida-alohida ta’riflagan.

Nationalisation is one of the practices of the Capitalist system, which is the transferral of individual property to State property, if the State viewed that there was a public interest which required the ownership of this property (by the State), which is originally owned by individuals. The State is not obliged to undertake nationalisation; rather it is free to nationalise if it chose to, or to leave the property as it was without nationalisation. This behaviour is different from that regarding the public property and State property, which are according to the rules of Islam, consistent with the nature of the property and its description, and it is so, irrespective of the view of the State. Thus the reality of the property has to be examined; if there was a right of all Muslims in it, then it would be a State property and she should own it. But if all the Muslims had no right in it, then it remains an individual property, which the State should not own. And if the property is of the community utilities or of the minerals, or its nature does not allow its individual ownership, then it becomes naturally a public property and the State cannot keep it as an individual property. If such property was not of the category of public property, then it has to remain as an individual property, and the State absolutely cannot nationalise it, nor can it own it against the will of its owner, unless He accepted to sell it to the State as He would sell to any individual, and the State bought it from Him as any individual would buy it. Thus the State cannot own the properties of individuals by force, under the pretence of the public interest, even if it paid its price; this is because the individual’s properties have to be respected and protected, and no one is allowed to commit aggression with regards to them even if it was the State. If this took place, the aggression would be considered eligible to be a subject of complaint, which the individual owner could submit to the Mahkamat al- Mathalim (court of unjust acts), allowing his complaint to be settled (and the unjust act removed). This is because the Khalifah has no right to take anything that is under the authority of anybody, except by a known and confirmed right. The State also cannot keep any part of the public or State properties in the hand of an individual under the pretence of the public interest, because the interest of the properties has been determined by the Shar’a when it identified the public property, State property and the individually-owned property.

Shunday qilib, millanshtirish (milliylashtirish) yo‘li bilan egallangan mulk jamoat mulki deb ham, davlat mulki deb ham hisoblanmasligi, yoki ilohiy hukmlarga kirmasligi aniq bo‘ladi; u aslida kapitalistik tizimning yamoqlaridan biridir.

Thus, it becomes clear that property owned by nationalisation is not considered to be of the public property, nor of the State property, or is it of the divine rules; it is rather one of the patches of the capitalist system.