For Shahrur, good governance does not begin with the question of who rules, but with an earlier question: who owns prohibition?
If the state, jurists, or the ruler possess the power of prohibition in God’s name, then the law itself becomes an instrument of sacred coercion. Shahrur therefore returns legitimacy to the sphere of analysis and prohibition, and separates it from direct political rule.
Central Idea
For Shahrur, legitimacy means that God alone possesses the power of prohibition, not that human beings rule in God’s name. Human beings enact civil laws to regulate what is permitted and what is changeable, but they do not add new religious prohibitions.
Strongest Evidence
Legitimacy is the restriction of prohibition to revelation: established by Legitimacy before God means that prohibition is confined to revelation and humans are prevented from adding prohibitions.
Divine prohibition is limited and human law is variable: established by Divine prohibition is limited and human law is a changing regulatory sphere.
Civil law is separate from historical jurisprudence: established by Jurisprudence is historical and civil law is separate from it.
The state does not possess prohibition: established by the state does not possess prohibition and Concept Center: legitimacy.
Its Effect on Good Governance
This point is politically decisive. Good governance is not complete if civil law turns at every moment into religious prohibition. Restricting prohibition prevents authority from expanding the forbidden in the name of religion, and leaves society and the state room for legal regulation, review, and independent reasoning.
Governance Table
| Domain | Ruling |
|---|---|
| Restricting prohibition to God | Strongly established. |
| Civil legislation | Established as changing human regulation. |
| Preventing humans from adding prohibitions | Strongly established. |
| Turning legitimacy into direct religious rule | Rejected within this path. |
| A fully developed institutional theory of separation | Not established in detail. |
What Must Not Be Claimed
It should not be said that Shahrur abolishes religion from the public sphere. More precisely, he prevents religion from being turned into a human power of prohibition. Nor should it be said that legitimacy in his thought means clerical rule; for him, it is a limit on human authority, not a source of its sanctity.