Is civil society possible in this case?

As the Muslim community grows, and as secularization becomes more common, it is important that either the two coincide or the Shari’a overcomes secularism. Regardless of what happens, Ramadan says that Muslims have to continue to be subjects of their own history. By this, he means Muslims need to have an active role in debates and current challenges, and that Muslims need to focus on how to raise themselves without too much influence from the West. It’s ironic that secularization is forced on MENA countries when the West used it as a way to gain freedom.

Ramadan advocates that all actions “bow before a structure of political ethics”. I assume, that because he says that this is done by making priorities and “cleansing the political sphere”, that he plans on unifying the Muslim world into one political sphere. He mentions that all of this happening will still allow civil society to exist. This is the part that puzzles me. How is a fully functioning civil society possible under a partially to fully secular regime? I can see how this might be possible if the Islamic state is synonymous to a civil state; however, I don’t see this as fully functional because an Islamic state is a very huge civil society that has the power to trump any other type of organization’s ideas and actions.