This is also because the office entails seeking counsel and firmness of resolve—qualities in which women are deficient—and publicly undertaking affairs directly, something prohibited to them.
It has been said that this minister may be a dhimmī (a protected non-Muslim subject), even though a minister of delegation may not be one of the dhimmīs. However, if they begin to overreach, they must be prevented from doing so.
The two ministries differ in four respects. First, the minister of delegation may exercise judicial authority and hear grievances, whereas this is not permitted to the minister of execution. Second, the minister of delegation may act independently in appointing governors, whereas the minister of execution may not. Third, the minister of delegation may independently direct armies and manage warfare, whereas the minister of execution may not. Fourth, the minister of delegation may administer the funds of the Bayt al-Māl (the public treasury), collecting what is due to it and disbursing what must be paid from it; this is not permitted to the minister of execution.
It is thus clear that their respective jurisdictions differ in these four respects. They also differ in four conditions. First, being free is required for the ministry of delegation but not for the ministry of execution. Second, Islam is required for the ministry of delegation but not for the ministry of execution. Third, knowledge of the rulings of Islamic law is required for the ministry of delegation but not for the ministry of execution. Fourth, knowledge of warfare and the kharāj (land tax) is required for the ministry of delegation but not for the ministry of execution.
Al-Khiraqī cited evidence indicating that it is permissible for a minister of execution to be a dhimmī. He said: “A disbeliever or a slave is not to be given from charity, unless they are among those employed to administer it; then they are given compensation commensurate with the work they performed.” A report from Aḥmad, however, indicates that this is prohibited. In the narration of Abū Ṭālib, he was asked, “May we employ a Jew or a Christian in Muslim affairs, such as the collection of kharāj?” He replied, “Their assistance is not to be sought in anything.”
The basis for this position is Allah’s saying: “Do not take as intimates those outside your ranks; they spare no effort to corrupt you.” And His saying: “Do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies.” The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also said: “Do not trust them, for Allah has deemed them treacherous.”
It is permissible for the caliph to appoint two ministers of execution to exercise oversight. If he grants each of them general supervisory authority, the arrangement is invalid for the reasons we have mentioned. We then consider the circumstances: if they were appointed at the same time, both appointments are invalid. If one of them preceded the other, the appointment of the first is valid and that of the later one is invalid. If he appoints them jointly to exercise oversight together, without granting either of them the authority to exercise it independently, the appointment is valid. The ministry is then vested in them jointly, but neither possesses independent supervisory authority. They may implement what they agree upon, but they may not implement what they disagree over. Such matters remain subject to the caliph’s decision and fall outside the jurisdiction of this ministry. This ministry falls short of the unrestricted ministry of delegation in two respects: