Doing research on Islamic fundamentals is my favourite work to do. I try to Learn Islamic principles which are free form the interpretations of different so-called scholars who try to impose their own views on our minds labelling them Islamic. These days i am trying to find the true political model of Islam based on Ijtehad coz in each Khilafat era each Khalifa introduced his own political system based on Ijtehad. In my opinion there is no such hard lines drawn for a political system in Islam rather basic principles of Justice, Democracy and welfare has been laid down by Islam upon which we have to do Ijtehad to fit it in the modern scenario.
I need your valuable views in this regard.

I wish we could institutionalize above attributes someday for these are prerequisite requirements of a Political model of Islam or an Islamic state.

Regards,

__________________
When you try, you risk failure. When you don’t try, you ensure it.

There is no such thing as Islamic Political System. Check out The whole Islamic history till to date. Look at first Four Kalifahs, Every One elected in a different way. Then there is Banu Ummayyah,,,and Banu Abbas... Total monarchy, Look at Muslim rule in Spain, India, Turkey,,,,!!! and now the present system of nation states,,,,,,Where is the established , solid, concrete Islamic System which we may call Islamic System????

Then why do they say that don,t make Pakistan a theocratic state???
then which political system do the Ulema's like Modoodi and Tahir-ul-Qadri want to impose on Pakistan when there is no any specific poltical model in Islam????

I think no particular system has been endorsed by the Muslim rulers. The most important thing in Islam is the Fundamental Principles that should be kept in mind like:
Justice,
Equality
Right to seek employment
Protection of Wealth, and social security
Fairness in the use of power (as rulers are custodians of power, Allah is the ultimate source of power).

So whatever system is introduced, these principles form the constitution of the system.

Political system doesn't mean only Electing a head of state or head of govt. eg . In England , firstly PM were elected by the wishes n whims of Monarch, eg Pitt the younger, lord north.
Then system changed to party strength in parliament... And now they are elected from majority party.
The parliament (the MPs) were initially elected by landlord genetry, then by capitalistic class as well, then proleteriat gained enfranchisement, and eventually through universal suffrage. Now this system changed over a period of time , wil we say England has no political system? Certainly we wont.
Political system is more concerned about the portfolioes, rights, obligations and accountability of the leader... Islam has clear and discrete principles n injunctions about them. However the process of election is amenable to evolve, systems evolve over a period of time. During Rashidum caliphate , common men were ignorant. If they had been given the right to elect their caliph they would have done hovac to islam. So islam had to adopt timocracy... The advisory council was elected on the basis of piety. Now this process of election can be modified, but code of conduct that is the heart of political system wil remain the same.

First, I have deliberately pointed towards election methods adopted in beginning of Islam. It is a sacred period for all Muslims so i have avoided going into detail. I do not want to spark any kind of controversy here. The point is that no structure of any kind regarding Political system was given.
Second, as far as qualities of " Justice, Fairness, Equity, Social security etc etc " are concerned, these are present in every religion, in every society, in every country. Which school of thought support bad things? Take constitution of USA, England, France,,,any country, or law of any country, They all support justice, fairness , equity. No one is in favour of Injustice, crime or bad society?
So the conclusion is that there is no such thing as Islamic Political system.

In my point of view, political model of Islam is quite visible in the State of Madina ruled by the Holy Prophet (SAW). Islam is not only the religion but a complete code of life; it explains each and every aspect of life, including political system. Historically, after the rule of four Caliphs, Muslim rules established monarchy or one man government; all powers were reserved to King and people had to obey what the King ordered. We can not termed this kind of government as Islamic Political Model.

Keeping in view your question, as per my knowledge, systems are based on principles, so as the Islamic political system, it is definitely based on Islamic principles. It includes:

Implementation of Amarbil Maroof-o-Nahi anil Munkir

Election or appointment

The leader of the Muslims simply should be from the majority, capable men who would lead well should be preferred over an ineffectual direct heir.

Accountability

If the rulers meet their Islamic responsibilities to the public, the people must obey their laws, but if they become either unjust or severely ineffective then the Caliph or ruler must be impeached via the Majlis ash-Shura.

Rule of Law (Sharia or Islamic law)

The following hadith establishes the principle of rule of law in relation to nepotism and accountability
Narrated ‘Aisha: The people of Quraish worried about the lady from Bani Makhzum who had committed theft. They asked, "Who will intercede for her with Allah's Apostle?" Some said, "No one dare to do so except Usama bin Zaid the beloved one to Allah's Apostle." When Usama spoke about that to Allah's Apostle Allah's Apostle said: "Do you try to intercede for somebody in a case connected with Allah’s Prescribed Punishments?" Then he got up and delivered a sermon saying, "What destroyed the nations preceding you, was that if a noble amongst them stole, they would forgive him, and if a poor person amongst them stole, they would inflict Allah's Legal punishment on him. By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad (my daughter) stole, I would cut off her hand."

Majlis-e-shura

The Majlis ash-Shura advises the caliph. The importance of this is premised by the following verses of the Quran:
“...those who answer the call of their Lord and establish the prayer, and who conduct their affairs by Shura. [are loved by God]”[42:38]
“...consult them (the people) in their affairs. Then when you have taken a decision (from them), put your trust in Allah”[3:159]

We have the guidelines but the problem is Muslims are ignorant of what Islam actually is !

Dude there are certain concrete differences b/w two eg islamic political system puts certain religious responsibilty on political head of state ( duty of promotion, observance and defense of religion, caliph is temporal as well as spiritual head)... But western systems don't, monarch, pm or president are just temporal head.
It is the islamic system that gave people right to elect their caliph through advisary council of the best among them... It was a new idea that time while west adopted it in 17th century.
Islam gave final blow to theory of divine right when caliph Abu Bakr assumed caliphate and renounced hashmites right. And upheld the principle of islam that caliph is not a family post. It was new idea that time. While west was naive to this til 17th century n Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan was defending it and john Lock introduced this concept in europe at the end of 17th century. So it was the islamic concept adoptd by the west.. And it is the tenet of islamic system adopted by the west.
Islam allows that head of state to be appointed on religious idetity a black slave can be appointed a caliph... ( ie an arab caliph for whole islamdon or a turk) bt a nomuslim citizen can't be.
In west , the emphasis is on citizenship not on religion...
( however i confess islamic system onces the most liberal system is now somewhat a redundent concept and has ancient look it is due to the fact it was not allowed to evolve due to untimely death of caliph umar, and worldly ambitions of Rashidun Successors.) bt islamic system is a reality you can't renounce its existence.

when I read the Islamic history.. I find that there was a difference in the method of appointment of each Kahlifa and each kahallifa had a different view of running the business of government... Like the 1st Khalifa Hazrat BAu Bakar Siddique R.A was nominated by Muhammad S.A.W,,, The 2nd Kahlifa Hazrat Umar R.A although nominated by Hazrat Abu BAkar R.A but Hazrat Umar R.A presented himself before the people of Madina/Makkah to legitimize his nomination.. The 3rd Kahlifa HAzrat Usman R.A was nominated by a Shura ( consultative commitee).. and there was a divide in Shura on the nomination of 4th Khalifa....
I don't want to create any controversy my sole intention is to get answers of my quests...
Which political model we should adopt????
Also there is a divide in Ummah on issue of Political model... Pakistan is a diverse country... Some sects support Khilafat while some Support Immamat....
Which is suitable for Pakistan, keeping in view its diversity......????