Scholars say lobby or build depending on context; only nusrah (military backing) transfers rule

Lobby or build depends on the institution; building doesn't contradict lobbying — only nusrah transfers rule

What it argues

One summary of the conversation and its 3 follow-up questions.

The Justice Council finds no fixed choice between lobbying and building institutions, finds no contradiction between doing both, and says force won Syria's transition only because its army split and Turkey sheltered the victors.

1. Lobbying or building depends on institution

   Captured institutions leave lobbying powerless, so Expert Opinions favour building new bodies instead. Movable institutions respond to conditional engagement and organised civic action, Expert Opinions say. Conditional engagement via BRICS and the OIC is proposed, seeking an equal voice and no new dependence. Which route works turns on whether a body is captured or still movable, not a fixed rule.

2. Organised voting as a proven lever

   Labour's vote fell in heavily Muslim UK seats in 2024; five pro-Gaza independents won. Tony Burke's first-preference vote fell from 52% to 48% in Australia's 2025 election. Organised voting moves power but transfers ruling authority to no one.

3. Force wins only where armies split

   Syria's 1963 and Sudan's 1989 army takeovers brought repression; Sudan's army removed its own ruler in 2019. HTS took Damascus in 2024 after civil war broke the army, sheltered by Turkey's Idlib presence since 2017. Al-Sharaa appointed 70 of 206 assembly members himself; Israel struck Syria 600+ times in 2025. Force won only because the army split, and the victor still depends on outside patrons, not an elected legislature.

4. Courts as a proven lever

   Organised civil groups in South Africa used courts to hold officials to account, Expert Opinions say. Hizb ut-Tahrir treats nusrah, army backing, as fixed, but treats force itself as a variable 'style'. Courts move officials to account without transferring ruling power.

5. Building and lobbying do not contradict nusrah

   The Plan builds new bodies and lobbies existing ones at the same time, Expert Opinions find. Only nusrah, backing from men of power, transfers ruling authority; community bodies hold community authority only. New bodies built include an advocacy secretariat, a drafting unit and a redress waqf. Building institutions and lobbying old ones serve different, compatible purposes; only nusrah transfers rule.

6. New institutions inherit founders' rules

   The New Development Bank still lends at interest, pricing South Africa's $1 billion loan off a US rate plus margin. For the second year running, BRICS foreign ministers failed to agree a joint statement. Even China's challenge to the present order keeps the UN at its core. A state-built alternative still follows its founders' rules; 'new' does not mean free of compromise.

7. OIC-led riba-free institutions proposed, untested

   Expert Opinions put building the OIC's own interest-free institutions ahead of deepening BRICS ties. Proposed bodies include a riba-free sovereign financing facility with the Islamic Development Bank and a hisbah network, funded by waqf. A redress waqf and secretariat, funded via mining-company deals, have no power to enforce law. These levers depend on consent and funding not yet secured, and have never been tried.

8. Bottom-up community governance proposed

   Dr Sohail Hanif proposes city councils that coordinate mosques, zakat, education and arbitration. Hanafi fatwas hold that Muslims in the West who can practise freely face no duty to emigrate. A grassroots route to communal authority, proposed but not yet built.

Read the original conversation →Converse →