Shura, a Quranic principle rooted in mutual consultation and accountability, serves as a foundational element of Islamic governance, embodying values such as justice, inclusivity, and collective decision-making. This paper conducts a comparative analysis of the Majlis Al-Shura in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, examining their structures, roles, and alignment with Islamic public value within the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states. Recent constitutional amendments in Qatar, following the November 5, 2024, referendum, have significantly altered the structure of its Shura Council. Qatar formerly used a hybrid system with partial elections before shifting to full appointment by the Emir. However, the new constitutional revisions abolished elections, making all members fully appointed by the Emir, aligning Qatar’s governance structure more closely with Saudi Arabia’s traditional model. Saudi Arabia’s Shura Council has long followed a fully appointed model. Their approaches to lawmaking and public engagement reflect evolving interpretations of Islamic governance. The study draws on legal texts and stakeholder insights to explore how each council balances Islamic values with modern governance. The key challenges facing Qatar since the abolishment of elections include reduced public participation, limitations in legislation, and changing women’s roles in governance. The study calls for greater transparency and civic engagement to align reform with Islamic values.
Abdulfatah Mohamed (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: