Press Release
Letter to Dr. Hakim Mutairi
(Translated)

To Dr. Hakim Mutairi,

Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,

I have examined your site and found that you have published under the title "The Legend of the Revolution... 23-Islamism and the Crisis of the Political Project" a second response to the letter of advice that the Hizb had sent to you on 11/28/2010.

However, your first response to the letter of advice was not the response published on the site; your first response to the letter of advice was dated 12/8-9/2010, which reads as follows:

[I disagree with what you inferred:

Firstly, your statement:

"And at the same time it grieves the Hizb to see or hear that there are authors calling for Khilafah "Caliphate" by turning it upside down; for you call for a union between tyrants that rule with systems that Allah has not ordained, and they construct for this union a council that they call "Khilafah "Caliphate" Council", as if it was an Islamic Summit or an Arab League, or at best a European Union between entities that are separate in jurisdiction from each other; and yet they call this project the Khilafah "Caliphate" project! So they work, intentionally or unintentionally, at distorting the image of the Khilafah "Caliphate" in the minds of the Muslims, and they disrupt those who are working for Khilafah "Caliphate"." It is clear evident that you do not understand our point of view about the issue whatsoever, and if you had read the book, Freedom or The Tsunami and the book Freeing the People, this illusion would have been eliminated, Allah willing, and if you had followed my site and my articles 'Towards Mature Political Awareness' then this suspicion would have been removed, because what is meant is the need to undertake organized collective political action seeking to change these governments and establish Islamic governments that help each other in order to return us to one Ummah and a Righteous Caliphate, and this is obligatory on everyone; I do not imagine there being any controversy in it, and it never occurred to me to appeal the tyrant governments to this issue!!!

Secondly: Hizb ut Tahrir, the Party of Justice and Charity, Al-Qaeda and other parties all aim to establish the Caliphate, and it is appreciated, and they were preceded by Hasan al-Banna and before him Rasheed Rida in his book Al-Khilafah "Caliphate" etc... but the intellectual project of the Khilafah "Caliphate" is one aspect and the political initiative is something else entirely, and they did not achieve anything, not the Brotherhood nor Hizb ut Tahrir, and as further proof is their failure after seventy years to accomplish anything in the political arena, not even the establishment of a state in Medina as the Prophet (saw) did!

Thirdly: The problem with Hizb ut Tahrir is that it undertook the method of establishing Khilafah "Caliphate" as an act of worship in of itself like prayer and the rest of the acts of worship that were revealed through Revelation, without realizing the difference between acts of worship that were revealed by Revelation and the rest of the Shari' obligations that an accountable person undertakes as to achieve what is requested such as Jihad in the way of Allah and ordaining what is good and stopping the oppressor... etc. and likewise the obligation to establish Allah's Law and His Caliphate is under the section of Jihad, not under the section of Prayer that does not have any room for opinion and Ijtihad, and there is a difference between the obligation to establish the Caliphate and the method of establishing the Caliphate.

And on this revelatory base the Hizb must seek any region to find the Nusrah; not necessarily a state. Thereby, Al-Qaeda today is closer to this action than Hizb ut Tahrir, and there is a difference between establishing the Caliphate in any place and establishing the Caliphate on the entire Ummah that has to help and obey it!

Fourthly: I do not imagine that the issue of Khilafah "Caliphate" is comparable to the issue of the establishment of the Prophet's state in Medina when the Prophet (saw) appealed for the Nusrah. For the difference between the two issues is obvious because the Companions in Medina established the Caliphate on the Day of Saqeefah when they initiated, consulted each other and chose Abu Bakr based on opinion and Ijtihad, and he did not appeal for the Nusrah from anyone and he did not do as the Prophet (saw) did. Because of this it is obligatory on the Muslims today that they gather with the people of authority and the people with the ability to establish the Caliphate and unify the Ummah without the assertion that they must do as the Prophet (saw) did in Mecca when he sought the Nusrah. Since [then] the people of Iman were not able to assemble for the establishment of the Caliphate it was obligatory for them to work to attain authority so that they could establish the Caliphate and attaining authority necessitates what we call a political project that achieves the ultimate objective!

Fifthly: It is not possible to compare the situation of the Ummah today, with it being in Dar al-Islam, to the situation of the Prophet (saw) in Mecca that was Dar al-Kufr and polytheism, for the Ummah today is addressed by the saying of the Almighty, ((اليوم أكملت لكم دينكم)) "This day have I perfected your religion for you" [Surah Maidah: Aya 3], so if it is in a state of weakness or in a state of authority that does not negate this description, for it is still accountable for all the Shari' rules and they are not relieved of any of them in any way. And if the Ummah becomes unified once again and the Khilafah "Caliphate" was returned again and then the Khalifah renounces his faith and the Ummah was split, would the Ummah be obligated to seek the Nusrah as the Prophet (saw), had done, or would it be obligatory to initiate removing him [the apostate Khalifah] or Jihad with force as in the Hadith, ‘إلا أن تروا كفرا بواحا' "provided they do not show outright disbelief" and the Hadith, ‘من جاهدهم بيده فهو مؤمن' "Whoever fights them with his hand is a believer" and other hadiths that legislate Jihad as permissible, then establishing another Khalifah and unifying the Ummah once again?! And what you state is the same as what we say about our situation, for it is obligatory to free the Ummah from the authority of the foreign Kafir enemy and its local agents, and it is obligatory on the people of every land to undertake and when they achieve that then it is obligatory upon everyone to cooperate on righteousness and piety; and unify the Ummah and then choose one Khalifah.

Sixthly: Hizb ut Tahrir has appreciated and blessed efforts in this regard but it does not practice any political action for change except for intellectual effort, and because of this it does not have any role in the Jihad for the sake of Allah to ward off the aggression from the Ummah, even though it is an individual and collective obligation upon the entire Ummah, under the pretext that a Caliphate does not exist, and this is the suspension of the many fixed Shar'i rulings that are categorically fixed in the Kitaab, Sunnah and the consensus of the Ummah, and for this reason Hizb ut Tahrir isolated itself from the Ummah and its reformist movement even though the Almighty says, ((وتعاونوا على البر والتقوى)) "and help one another in goodness and piety," and they even do not participate in any activity that the reformists collaborate with to establish the Haq and revoke the wrong, and I do not know about the circumstances in Sudan, for it might  be different!

Seventhly:  Dear Brother, the book, Ahl as-Sunnah and the Political Crisis, is directed at the Salafis specifically and the Sunnis in general; they have their origins and foundations in reasoning and argument. We speak to them with what they comprehend and grasp; this being from the Shariah policy, as for the others, they may refer to our other books.

I would have preferred if you had kept your advice free from slandering your brother in his land that he is cajoling the tyrant, and if these suspicions were evident on any Muslim he would be unable to defend himself, for we live in our country, work in our universities, and we carry passports; and all this being under illegitimate legislative systems and there is no harm in that and this is not considered cajoling a tyrant because the Ummah is the origin and the land is the Ummah's land, and the Dar is its Dar by the judgement of Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw).  These regimes are illegitimate and temporary, and the guardianship of the Ummah is for it even if an illegitimate ruler is imposed on them; and there exists the responsibility to remove him and fight him with the sword and change it; not to forbid the Ummah from its authority over itself and land and resources and I have elaborated this saying in Freedom of the Human.

Eighthly: I hope that the brotherhood and love will remain between us no matter how our opinions differ, for everyone is guided to the path that Allah (swt) has created for him, and we are brothers by the text of the Quran, so do not let a difference in opinion be a barrier between you and the people who follow what I write, for you might find what deserves to be looked at and what could contribute to our joint goal, which is the establishment of the Khilafah "Caliphate" that you consider as, and the path to as, a form of revelatory worship, and that I see as an obligation based on Ijtihad that needs to be realized by all ways of Jihad in all of its art forms and talents in political project work, for the aim is the realization of the unity of the Ummah and the establishment of Allah's law on Earth, for that is what succession on Earth is.

And I apologize for the ellipsis in discussion, and there is confusion that cannot be cleared unless you review all that I have written on this subject, and we ask Allah for success and guidance for you and us, Ameen!

Love you for the sake of Allah, Dr. Hakim Mutairi] End

It is obvious that his reply is insincere that resembles indifference to people of knowledge, therefore the Hizb responded on 12/10/2010 with the following:

[Bismillah al-Rahman el-Raheem

To Dr. Hakim Mutairi,

Assalamu Alaikum wa Rahmat Allahu wa Barakatu,

Alhamdulillah and peace and blessings be on Rasool Allah and on his family, companions and those who followed him,

We do not like argument, and we sent you our letter of advice and we figured that we were sincerely advising a person of knowledge among the Muslims for the sake of following the truth (Haq) according to the Sharii' evidence, and we showed you the obligatory nature of the Nusrah because Rasool Allah (saw) established the State with it, but you replied to us with a letter that reached us on the night of 8/9-12-2010 with what resembles mocking and ridicule... which is different from the sincerity of people with knowledge.

For you say that the Companions in Medina on the Day of the Saqifah established the Khilafah and Abu Bakr became the Khaleefah without asking for the Nusrah from anyone! So did the companions and Abu Bakr establish a state or did they continue a state that Rasool Allah (saw) had established for them by way of asking for the Nusrah? Is it comprehensible that you do not realize the difference between the establishment of a state and its continuation, except if you were mocking the Nusrah and ridiculing it?!

And you say that if the Khilafah exists and the Khaleefah disbelieved (Kafr), would the Ummah seek Nusrah or kill him... So is this a case of establishing a state or a situation of the Khaleefah in the case of the presence of the Khilafah "Caliphate" State? Is it comprehensible that you do not realize the difference between establishing a state that requires seeking the Nusrah, and between the situation of the Khaleefah in the case of the existence of a state that where they would reject him with the sword if he announced outright disbelief, except if you were mocking the Nusrah and ridiculing it?!

And it is used against us that we formed a revelatory methodology of establishing the Khilafah according to evidences like the forms of worship, in which you add: based on this revelatory foundation the Hizb must search for any region where they might find the Nusrah, and not necessarily a state! Is it comprehensible that you do not realize that the Nusrah is sought from the people of power to establish a state and that is not possible in "any place" except from a state, except if you were mocking the Nusrah and ridiculing it?!

Nevertheless, you were not satisfied with mocking the Nusrah and ridiculing it, whereas the Nusrah is a great issue, instead you accuse us, as do others who despise the Khilafah and its people, you accuse us implicitly, rather openly, that we stall Jihad, and numerous legislations (Ahkam), with the excuse of the Khilafah "Caliphate"'s absence! Is that so, Doctor? So in which book or statement from Hizb ut Tahrir did you find these words? Do you not fear Allah in a pious pure party, and we do not commend anyone over Allah, you wish in your letter the persistence of brotherhood between us and you?

In any case, I am content with your reply, and it does not hurt the Hizb that the number of those mocking and ridiculing be increased by one, for the end is for the righteous, and Allah subhannahu is with the righteous.

And we will close this dialogue with you, and consider that we advised you, and became acquainted with your character, Wassalam.

Fourth of Muharram 1432 AH - 10/12/2010] End

Thus the correspondences have ended with you.

Dear brother: Your second published reply on your website, even if parts of it were unfair, was a polite reply, and closer to the reply of people of knowledge than your first that was previously mentioned, and how much we had hoped that your second reply has preceded the first, but that is not how it happened!

Anyway, we had not send you the letter of advice as a matter of argument, instead, it was a matter of the Prophet's (saw) Hadith:

الدِّينُ النَّصِيحَةُ" قُلْنَا: لِمَنْ؟ قَالَ: "لِلَّهِ وَلِكِتَابِهِ وَلِرَسُولِهِ وَلِأَئِمَّةِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَعَامَّتِهِمْ" رواه مسلم"

"The Deen is Naseehah (sincerity and sincere advice)." We said: To whom? He said: "To Allah, His Book, His Messenger and to the leaders of the Muslims and the general people."

After what we had some across in your book of good mixed with the not good, it had prompted to draw the straight line in front of the other line, and we saw that if you accepted the advice it would be good, and that is what we expected and wished, and if you did not accept the advice, then we can not compel you to abide, that could come from you. Therefore we are content with the correspondences, and we will not reply to the parts of your reply that are published unfairly on your website, for our letter of advice is sufficient, and our opinions are clear in our books and statements that are available on our website for everyone.

In conclusion, it would have been better for those who visit your website had you published our letter of advice and then published your reply, instead of using excerpts and replying to those without replying to the rest, for the picture was not clear to the reader, is that not so?

Wassalamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu.

Note: We did not publish on our website the letter of advice and its reply until you had mentioned the issue on your website, as it was, then we will publish the letter of advice and your first reply to it, but your second reply as sentence fragments and we will publish it Insha'allah when you publish our letter of advice on your website ... and Allah (swt), the Righteous.

Osman Bakhach
Director of The Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir

Note: To read the leaflet from Hizb ut Tahrir