for him to comply with the subjects’ wishes? Or should he withdraw, although the subjects dislike this, knowing that the injustice will remain and increase if he withdraws?

He replied:

Praise be to Allah.

Yes. If he strives to uphold justice and remove injustice to the best of his ability, and his administration is better and more beneficial for the Muslims than that of someone else, and his control of the grant is better than someone else’s, as described, then he may retain his office and grant without incurring any sin. Indeed, retaining them is better than relinquishing them if he would not devote himself to something better upon relinquishing them. It may even be obligatory for him to remain if no one else capable of fulfilling this responsibility undertakes it.

Establishing justice and removing injustice, to the extent possible, is a collective obligation. Each person must do whatever he can if no one else takes his place in doing so. In these circumstances, he is not required to remove injustice that he is unable to remove. Nor is he held responsible for levies imposed by rulers that he cannot abolish.

If the rulers and their deputies demand sums that can only be paid by retaining some of those levies, and if withholding payment would lead them to transfer those grants and that office to someone who would maintain or increase the injustice rather than reduce it, then collecting those levies and paying the proceeds to them is better for the Muslims than retaining all the levies. Whoever is turned away from these practices toward justice and beneficence is closer to them than others, while anyone touched by any of this is further removed from justice and beneficence