This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Islamic Political Thought — most prominently associated with Taha Jabir Alalwani et al. — to re-read the AprIGF 2019 Vladivostok conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.
Introduction: The Problem
The tradition of Shura (consultation) in Islamic political thought offers a distinct perspective on consensus-building. AprIGF contains the dialogue possibility between the Western deliberative model and Islamic Shura.
This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of AprIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.
Deliberation from Islamic perspective
Participation from Russia (especially Arab/Islamic countries) can bring a policy-evaluation framework based on Maslaha (public welfare). This adds a new dimension to データローカライゼーション debate.
Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.-type problematic.
The regional IGF (AprIGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.
Maslaha (public welfare)
Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2019 conference. We examine that application below.
1. Application to "データローカライゼーション"
Discussion of "データローカライゼーション" can be positioned, from the perspective of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), as a central problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around データローカライゼーション are particularly at stake.
2. Application to "セキュリティ"
Discussion of "セキュリティ" can be positioned, from the perspective of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), as a derivative problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around セキュリティ are particularly at stake.
3. Application to "AI"
Discussion of "AI" can be positioned, from the perspective of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around AI are particularly at stake.
4. Application to "地域協調"
Discussion of "地域協調" can be positioned, from the perspective of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 地域協調 are particularly at stake.
5. Application to "越境データ"
Discussion of "越境データ" can be positioned, from the perspective of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus), as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Russia's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around 越境データ are particularly at stake.
Implications for Executives and Practitioners
The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Taha Jabir Alalwani et al. perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Russia.
First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Shura (consultation) and Ijma (consensus). Second, in dialogue with regulators and civil society, it suggests dimensions of consensus formation that purely technical arguments cannot reach. Third, it indicates that the long-term ground of business legitimacy lies not so much in technical advantage or market share as in participation in such philosophical-normative debates.
Academic Positioning and Future Research
The argument of this essay attempts to graft a philosophical perspective onto the mainstream political-science and legal approaches to internet governance research. Three future research questions follow.
- Verification of the applicability of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al.'s framework to other IGF conferences
- Comparative contrast between Islamic Political Thought and other theoretical traditions
- Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Russia
In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.
Primary Sources
- IGF Secretariat. Annual Reports of AprIGF.
- AprIGF 2019 Vladivostok Conference Materials.
- Japan IGF Support Organization. https://japanigf.jp/
- Nakazawa Yuki Blog. https://nkzw.jp/category/igf/
Secondary Sources (Philosophy)
- Works of Taha Jabir Alalwani et al. (representative texts of Islamic Political Thought)
*This piece belongs to the academic essays (philosophy series). The author's views do not necessarily represent those of any institutional affiliation. Feedback and critique are welcome.*
更新履歴
第1稿投稿 2026年6月26日 11時47分（記事コンテンツアップ）
— 中澤祐樹
