Talk:Islamic republic

Inconsistent capitalization

Proper names, references to proper names, translations of proper names, suggested proper names, paraphrases of proper names, etc. should all be capitalized. "Republic" should only be lower case when referring to a type of government, not when referring to an actual government's name. A list of the proper names of countries with "Islamic" or "Islamic Republic" in their names -- next to a list of the proper names of countries considered to be "Islamic republics" without being properly named as such -- would seem to be a worthwhile addition to this page. The "considered to be" part is a flamewar which I will leave to others.

Terminology

Please just state the main pionts, ya add in a lot of bull that aren't really needed.

What's that supposed to mean? David.Monniaux 06:39, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Moved from the article, since it belongs on the talk page Nik42 05:59, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

There are some factual inaccuracies in description of Islamic Republic of Pakistan (IRP):- 1. IRP is neither democratic nor secular. Constitution explicitly states that sovreignity exclusively belongs to "Allah", and Islamic laws override the legislation done by Parliament. There is a mechanism through "Fedral Shariat Court" which can strike down any law found against Islam. As for democracy, it is more or less as much democratic as Islamic Republic of Iran is. The role of "shoora-i-nighaban" is carried by a council of military commanders. Though military commanders do it in blatant violation of constitution, whereas "shoora-i-nighaban" in Iran works through constitutional mechanism.

{My comment: The fact that Military rulers, when they interfere with civilian rule, are violating the constitution... is in of itself defeats your argument. Pakistani constitution envisages a democracy and does not provide for any subversion of the civilian authority. There is no council. General Musharraf had come to power through a coup and has since then tried to legitimise his position through constitutional amendments empowering him to keep two offices. However this again does not constitutionally establish the military's role... though in actual reality military plays a huge role.

We are concerned about what the constitutional concept of the state is and not the mess Pakistanis have made of the constitution. The Islamic Republic of Pakistan is defined in the constitution as a federal democratic republic to be known as the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The fundamental rights chapter establishes freedom of religion and equality of citizenship. Islamic Laws themselves are to be discussed and debated by an elected parliament on the basis of universal adult franchise. The head of the government i.e. the Prime Minister of Pakistan can be a Non-Muslim... though that is seemingly impossible. Personally I think the use of the prefix Islamic is superfluous.}

2. It is not true that governement documents are prepared under the name "Federation of Pakistan". "Islamic republic of Pakistan" is only acknowledged name of the country. Official documents, though also additionaly refer to "Federal Governement" of "Islamic Republic of Pakistan".

You obviously know very little. Pakistan has an elected government and a constitution that is mostly secular. Sure Islam is the state religion and the Head of State is supposed to be muslim, but the UK also has a state religion and the Queen must be a protestent.

The most influential jurist and judge in Pakistan's legal history was a christian, A. R. Cornelius. The present senior judge is a Hindu, Rana Bhagwandas.

The Federal Shariah Court is the Supreme Court sitting in a another capacity, all memebers of the Supreme Court, the only difference is that retired judges are also eligable to sit on it as well. Its judistriction is limited only to religious matters, and it can be overruled by the Supreme Court,as it was in the "Interest Cases." Sure the Supreme Court can overrule Parliamnetry Legislation if it is unconstitutional, as can the US Supreme Court.

As for the Federation and Islamic Republic issues, well both are used in the constitution and both are correct.The reason the Ferderation is used more often is simply because in most matters it is the Ferderation of the Provinces that is acting. So the a court case for example, "Federation of Pakistan v XYZ". It is just a convention nothing else.

Islamic republic -- A name with Contradiction

A state is Islamic (laws of Allah by Quran/Sunnah) and Republic ("In a broad definition a republic is a state or country that is led by people who do not base their political power on any principle beyond the control of the people of that state or country"). It is a big joke and nothing else. Secondly By changing name a state does not become Islamic. There is NO Islamic State exist, except Iran (may be) for Shias only. --- Faisal 22:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Nevertheless, "Islamic Republic" is still the name given in English to certain Muslim republics. That's just the way it is. According to the Afghanistan article, it too is an Islamic republic, and there are probably others. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 11:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

what nonsense. A Republic is a state without a hereditary monarchy. An Islamic Republic is a Republic which bases its constitution on Islam. Having a state religion and being a republic isn't in any way contradictory. An Islamic Republic is a Republic constituted by Muslims just like the Roman Republic was a Republic constituted by people worshipping the Roman gods. --dab (𒁳) 09:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Your definition of republic could also define a monarchy, or an ologarchy. Ironic, that it also describes Pakistan and Iran.Fuzbaby (talk) 01:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Citations and/or references

The article seems fine, but I'm a bit worried about WP:OR creeping in because it doesn't cite it's sources. <<-armon->> 21:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Sudan?

What about Sudan? Didn't it become an "Islamic Republic" some twenty-five years ago? bandishhh 22 June 2007 (UTC)

I can't find when Sudan became and unbecame an Islamic Republic online. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Tags on sources and need of expert

This article needs sources and some quotes by Islamists on how in an Islamic Republic, God and not citizens are soveriegn. --BoogaLouie (talk) 21:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

++_afghanistan==

Why can't I edit afghanistan when I been there- this is wank —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uksoldiersforhamas (talk • contribs) 18:49, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggested solution

I've been thinking about the recent disagreement regarding the addition of Arabic Republics to this article and I've come up the the idea of renaming this article into "Republics in the Arab world." I see mostly an upside with this change suggestion. Thoughts/suggestions? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 23:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

We don't need a solution when there isn't a problem. The title of this article is "Islamic Republic". The article is about states which designate themselves "Islamic Republic". The Islamic Republics of Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan are NOT part of the Arab world. No Islamic Republic describes itself as an "Arab republic". --Folantin (talk) 07:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

indeed. There is no "disagreement", there is only User:Jaakobou failing to admit they have no case. If you do want to make yourself useful, turn Arab_world#States_and_territories into a clean table, including a column giving each country's full official name. --dab (𒁳) 09:41, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion dab, I may take up on it. Anyways the issue, IMHO, is that both "republics" are simply self described as such and only a handful of them could honestly be described as republics. The article's title is actually misleading and it is quite suggestive of false information as if "Islamic republic" is an established form of government with a clear structure (article makes a clear but ref-less argument that it doesn't). Anyways, I'm not insisting on connecting the two, but I am interested in further clarifications of the two widely different "republics" of both the self-described as Islamic Republic, and the self described as Arab Republic. I'd be interested in any suggestions that help bring this article to wikipedia standards of sourcing and helps bring along also the Arab Republic "gov. style". Thoughts/suggestions? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 16:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

p.s. do let me know if you want me to tag a few places in the current article that are poorly structured and/or lack sourcing. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 16:58, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

If you want to give the world your opinions on whether Islamic Republics are really "republics" or not, go to Blogspot. --Folantin (talk) 17:38, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok. Now that I know your purpose here (hint: it doesn't include reading comments of others), I'll try working with others. Thanks for the clarification. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 08:49, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was moved to Islamic republic. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Islamic Republic → NewName — In keep with wikipedia guidelines,etc. Not a term in which the second word is by necessity capitalized. Ie., it's correct to write either " the Islamic Republic" or "the Islamic republic" unless it is used as part of "The Islamic Republic of Iran", etc. Pisharov (talk) 02:07, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support Shouldn't really be controversial. Islamic republic should only be capitalised when used as part of a title. Skinsmoke (talk) 14:56, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

• Support per nom. — AjaxSmack 20:20, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
• Support, have requested {{db-move}} as seems uncontroversial. --Cybercobra (talk) 02:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ambiguous sentence

This sentence seems ambiguous: "Iran's Islamic republic is in contrast to the semi-secular state of the Republic of Pakistan (proclaimed as an Islamic Republic in 1956) where Islamic laws are technically considered to override laws of the state, though in reality their relative hierarchy is ambiguous."

which is it referring to, Iran or Pakistan? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.233.182.92 (talk) 21:25, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Is Sudan an Islamic republic?

Sudan is a republic that employs a legal system based on Islamic law. Could Sudan be included in this article as an Islamic republic? 108.0.244.168 (talk) 05:30, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Gambia

Just a quick note to announce that I have added Gambia to the map based on the Beeb article. Happy Christmas and holidays to all! - Thanks, Hoshie 23:00, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

No, it's not an Islamic republic, the move is unconstitutional. The constitution needs to be amended first. Just because the State House has decided to start using that designation, that does not overturn the country's written constitution. I have removed it, as in the The Gambia article. --B.Lameira (talk) 12:34, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Information in more depth, here: [1] --B.Lameira (talk) 12:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Islamic republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151003084704/http://supremecourt.gov.af/en/page/614/the-supreme-court-chief-justice-biography to http://supremecourt.gov.af/en/page/614/the-supreme-court-chief-justice-biography

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)