Question:
When you were in TNTJ, we have seen many of your lectures where you said Muslims should not join government departments like the police or the military. The reason you gave was that Islam teaches that one should not stand up to show respect in that manner. But in the police force, one must stand and salute superior officers. One must salute the flag. Many other actions that conflict with religious principles may also become necessary. When the now-banned organization PFI used to perform salutes and show respect to the flag, you strongly criticized them. Those criticisms are still available on the internet. But now people who are currently in TNTJ are campaigning from stage to stage saying that Muslims can join the police. Their explanation is that every government department will inevitably contain some wrong practices, but a Muslim can still remain firm upon monotheism and work in the police or even serve as an IAS officer. So which position is correct? Was it wrong to say earlier that saluting and honoring the flag falls under shirk? Or is the current position of these people wrong? In a country where fascist tendencies dominate the administrative system, is it actually possible for someone to work in the police or as an IAS officer while maintaining true faith? Please explain this from an Islamic perspective.
Answer:
If the question is asked in general terms — can a person work in the police or the military?
In principle, yes. It is a job. Protecting a nation is a beneficial task. The duty of the police is to protect people. From that angle alone, it cannot automatically be declared a forbidden profession. However, we must look at the reality. In many countries today, the police and the military are often turned into tools that support the injustices committed by governments.
Consider an example.
People protest for some cause. The constitution itself grants citizens the right to protest. If people are dissatisfied with government actions, they will naturally raise their voices.
But what happens?
Instead of addressing the protesters peacefully, orders are given for a lathi charge. If there is a large crowd, the order becomes: “Beat them and disperse them.”
In many Western countries, protesters are handled differently. Authorities calmly detain individuals, remove them from the area, and control the situation without brutality.
But what happens in our country? Orders are given to beat and disperse the crowd.
Now think about the policeman standing there.
Can he disobey that order? If he refuses, disciplinary action will be taken against him. Therefore, he must also join in beating the protesters. Consider another issue. A person has been accused of a crime. The case is under trial. According to law, the court should determine guilt and issue punishment.
But what often happens? The person is killed in what is called an “encounter.”
The explanation given is: “He attempted to attack the police, so we shot him.”
In reality, in perhaps 999 out of 1000 cases, this claim is false.
Maybe in very rare situations a suspect might attack the police. But in most cases, the accused is punished without the crime being proven in court. The police themselves take the law into their own hands.
Now imagine you are part of that department. One day the chief minister or higher authorities may give an order: “Eliminate that person.”
If you are the officer sitting in that position, you are the one who must execute that order.
Now compare two issues. Saluting someone or saluting a flag may be considered wrong, but that affects only the individual himself. Someone might claim he did it under compulsion.
But the larger issue is injustice against others. Do these departments commit injustice against others or not?
Suppose someone in the ruling party dislikes a person. The order may come: “File a case against him.” What happens next?
A false case is fabricated. They might say: “He was found with cannabis.” Even if everyone knows he never possessed any drugs, the case will still be filed. If you are an inspector and the SP orders it, you must do it. So, the person who joined the police claiming he wanted to protect society ends up turning an innocent man into a criminal.
Is this permissible in Islam? Consider interrogation.
Suspects are brought to the station and beaten in custody. Sometimes they are beaten to death. If you are a constable, you must also participate in the beating.
If you are an officer, you must give the order to beat. Because the order has come from above. Now we must ask: are these departments primarily used for the welfare of the nation?
Perhaps in some cases. But in reality, in many places 90% of their use is for political revenge, suppression of opponents, or supporting powerful individuals against the weak.
Then there is the issue of bribery.
You may personally refuse to accept bribes. But your superiors may not allow that.
Because bribes move upward through the hierarchy. The money collected below is distributed above. If you refuse to participate, false charges may be brought against you and disciplinary action taken. Then what happens? Someone comes asking for help to commit injustice. Money is offered. The officer takes the money and facilitates the wrongdoing. That is the reality.
Another example.
A street vendor sets up a small shop. Instead of enforcing the law properly, the police may say: “Give us 200 rupees every day and keep the shop open. If you refuse, we will destroy your stall and chase you away.”
Does this happen or not? It happens.
In many countries, police and military systems are used to oppress innocent people.
Should we willingly enter such systems?
One might say to Allahﷻ : “I saluted the flag because I was compelled.”
But can someone say: “I beat an innocent man to death because I was compelled”?
Can someone justify filing false charges against another human being by claiming compulsion? When we violate the rights of others, the matter becomes extremely serious. Our acts of worship can become meaningless because of such oppression. Therefore, anyone who truly fears the Hereafter should avoid entering such professions if possible.
If someone is already there, he should try to distance himself from wrongdoing. Some people say: “If we join, we can protect our community.” This is mostly an illusion. If a superior officer orders you to beat someone, you must beat him. If he says beat a Muslim, you must beat him. If he says beat a Hindu, you must beat him.
It is a structure built upon obedience to orders. Therefore, any profession that requires a person to commit injustice against others is not appropriate for a Muslim. Personal sins between a person and Allahﷻ may be forgiven. But violating the rights of others is far more serious. So why should a person participate in injustice merely for the sake of a salary?
That is the question every thoughtful person should ask.