طرق اختيار رئيس الدولة بين الفقه الاسلامي والدستور الصومالي

Abstract

The research revolves around documenting the methods of selecting the head of state in both Islamic jurisprudence and the Somali Constitution, highlighting the similarities and differences between them. The central issue lies in exploring the concept and frameworks of selecting the head of state through both the constitution and Islamic jurisprudence. The researcher seeks to answer a key question: What are the methods of selecting the head of state according to both Islamic jurisprudence and the Somali Constitution? To address this question, the researcher employs a comparative inductive approach, analyzing the methods stipulated in Islamic jurisprudence and the Somali Constitution while providing interpretations that align with the nature of this study. The research has led to several key findings. First, both the constitution and Islamic jurisprudence use the same terminology—method of selection—despite differences in their essence and content. Second, the method of selecting the head of state in the modern Somali Constitution, which involves secret voting by members of the Federal Parliament, is very similar to the method outlined in Islamic jurisprudence. Third, however, the qualifications and criteria for parliamentary membership in the Somali Constitution differ from those required for Ahl al-Hall wa al-'Aqd (the council of decision-makers) in the Islamic system. Fourth, the historical events and circumstances that influenced the selection process of the president in the Somali Constitution indicate that Somalis lack a clear vision for resolving their current political situation, particularly concerning elections. Fifth, this lack of vision has contributed to sovereignty fragmentation and foreign interventions, pushing Somalia into a state of external power struggles.

Keywords : Selection of the Head of State, Islamic Jurisprudence, Somali Constitution.