Evaluation of voting in democratic elections in terms of Islamic law

The 17th century concepts of democracy and secularism, which took their current form with the influence of enlightenment ideas, caused intense debates in the last periods of the Ottoman Empire and resulted in the transition to the Republican regime in 1923. Subsequently, the abolition of the caliphate led to various debates on the relationship between the political institution and religion. Muslim nations have debated about the jurisprudential dimension of participation in democratic elections, which is subject to various interpretations and practices in the countries in which they live, including positive, negative and conditional views. Attempts have been made to reach a jurisprudential conclusion from various points such as the meanings of democracy and secularism in terms of their origins, the legislative authority of the election of the head of state, the source of sovereignty according to Islam, their value in terms of local governments such as municipal elections, and the competency of the voter. In Islamic jurisprudence, there are long explanations about the determination of the head of state and the role of the people in this matter in the works of siyāset al-shar'iyya. Democracy, which is based on the principle of direct election of the head of state by the people, a method that did not exist in Islam and pre-Islamic Turks, has gained its actual meaning around the idea of 'social contract' developed by thinkers such as J.J. Rousseau. In our study, these concepts and institutions are defined, historical origins and etymological details are given, and all factors affecting voting behaviour are touched upon. Those who do and do not consider it permissible to vote in democratic elections are analysed together with their proofs. Finally, points such as intention and ignorance are touched upon in terms of affecting the act of the taxpayer in fiqh.