Revision as of 08:20, 19 February 2013 editKurtis (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers10,773 edits →Adultery: rm unreferenced sentence; poor grammar to begin with, but unlikely to be true (or at least verifiable)← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 19:22, 8 January 2025 edit undoWill Hanley (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users643 editsm repeated word | ||
(621 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Category of prescribed punishments in Islamic law}} | |||
{{about|hadd|HADD|Calcific tendinitis|the Hudud ordinances in Pakistan|Hudood Ordinance}} | |||
{{About|the concept in Islamic law|the series of laws concerning this topic in Pakistan|Hudood Ordinances}} | |||
{{Redirect|Hadd|other uses|HADD (disambiguation)}} | |||
{{italic title}} | |||
{{Fiqh |criminal}} | |||
'''''Hudud'''''{{efn|]: {{lang|ar|حدود}} ''Ḥudūd'', also transliterated ''hudood''; plural of '''''hadd''''', {{lang|ar|حد}}}} ({{Langx|ar|حدود}}) is an ] word meaning "borders, boundaries, limits".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Wehr |first1=Hans |title=Hans Wehr Dictionary of Arabic |page=135 |url=https://giftsofknowledge.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/hans-wehr-searchable-pdf.pdf |access-date=20 June 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180620203718/https://giftsofknowledge.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/hans-wehr-searchable-pdf.pdf |archive-date=2018-06-20 |url-status=live }}</ref> In classical Islamic literature, punishments are mainly of three types; ]-], hudud and ]. Hudud covers the punishments given to people who exceed the limits associated with the Quran and deemed to be set by Allah (Hududullah is a phrase repeated several times in the Quran without labeling any type of crime<ref>The Quran mentions the “limits of God” several times, warning Muslims of the sin of transgressing them and that they should not even approach them (Quran 2:187). But nowhere does the phrase appear in the clear context of labeling certain crimes (see Quran, 2:229, 4:14, 58:4, 65:1, though 4:14 is followed by discussion of sexual impropriety.https://yaqeeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Stoning-and-Hand-Cutting-Understanding-the-Hudud-and-the-Shariah-in-Islam-1.pdf</ref>), and in this respect it differs from ] ({{Langx|ar|تعزير|lit=penalty}}). These punishments were applied in pre-modern Islam,<ref name=hallaq-intro-173>] (2009), ''An introduction to Islamic law'', p.173. ]. {{ISBN|9780521678735}}.</ref><ref name=peters-OEIW/> and their use in some modern states has been a source of controversy. | |||
The only crimes for which the punishment is determined in the Quran consists of ], ], ] and ].<ref name="zmh11"/><ref>{{cite book|author=Asifa Quraishi|page=126| title=Windows of Faith: Muslim Women Scholar-activists in North America|publisher= Syracuse University Press|isbn=978-0-815-628514|year=2000}}</ref> Jurists have differed as to whether ] and rebellion against a lawful Islamic ruler stated as ] are ''hudud'' crimes.<ref name=mdth1 /><ref name="Campo, Juan Eduardo 2009 p.174">Campo, Juan Eduardo (2009). ''Encyclopedia of Islam'', p.174. Infobase Publishing. {{ISBN|978-0816054541}}.</ref> Although hiraba along with the way of punishment is mentioned in the Quran, ] Muhammad applied ], which is a method based on the Quran, for a similar situation, not what is stated in the relevant (5:33) verse.<ref>The Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered the killers punished in exactly the same way Yet prominent scholars were skeptical of reports that he had actually ordered the murderers' hands or feet to cut off. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Stoning-and-Hand-Cutting-Understanding-the-Hudud-and-the-Shariah-in-Islam-1.pdf</ref><ref>{{cite book|last=Otto|first=Jan Michiel|title=Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries|publisher=Amsterdam University Press|isbn=978-90-8728-048-2|pages=663, 31|year=2008}}</ref><ref>Philip Reichel and Jay Albanese (2013), Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice, SAGE publications, {{ISBN|978-1452240350}}, pp. 36–37</ref> While ] from religion are only condemned in the Quran - apart from otherworldly punishments - and are asked to "not accept their testimony forever", the classical understanding of sharia punishes them with death and some understandings also accept acts of nonworship such as "abandoning prayer and alms" as apostasy.<ref>{{cite journal | url=https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kiid/issue/67123/982657#article_cite | doi=10.52637/kiid.982657 | title=İslam Hukukunda Namaz Kılmayanın Hükmü | date=2021 | last1=Eki̇Nci̇ | first1=Ahmet | journal=Kocatepe İslami İlimler Dergisi | volume=4 | issue=2 | pages=388–409 | doi-access=free }}</ref> (See:]) Another examples whose punishments are not specified include 80 lashes for drinking alcohol and ] for adultery of married people. Again, some understandings tend to add ] to these crimes, which are defined as an evil act in the Qur'an with an undefined response such as "torment them" (4ː16). | |||
{{Fiqh-Cri}} | |||
'''Hudud''' (]<span style="font-size:large"></span>, also transliterated '''hadud''', '''hudood'''; singular '''hadd''', <span style="font-size:large">]</span>, literal meaning "limit", or "restriction") is the word often used in ]ic literature for the bounds of acceptable behaviour and the punishments for serious crimes. In Islamic law or '']'', hudud usually refers to the class of punishments that are fixed for certain crimes that are considered to be "claims of God." They include ], ] and ] ('']''), consumption of ] or other intoxicants ('']'')(wrong link), and ] (see ]). | |||
Traditional ] ({{Langx|ar|فقه|translit=fiqh}}) divides crimes into offenses against God ({{Langx|ar|جرائم ضد الله}}) and those against man ({{Langx|ar|جرائم ضد الناس}}). The former are seen to violate God's ''hudud'' or "boundaries", and they are associated with punishments specified in the ] and in some cases inferred from ].<ref name=mdth1/><ref name="jacb">{{cite book|last1=Brown|first1=Jonathan A.C. |author-link=Jonathan A. C. Brown |title=Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy|date=2014|publisher=]|isbn=978-1780744209|pages=|chapter=5. Muslim Martin Luthers and the Paradox of Tradition|chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/misquotingmuhamm0000brow/page/180}}</ref> ''Hudud'' crimes cannot be pardoned by the victim or by the state, and the punishments must be carried out in public<ref name=Terrill-wcjs-629>{{cite book|last1=Terrill|first1=Richard J.|title=World Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey|orig-year=1984|year=2009|publisher=Routledge.|page=629|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=hJaEzC1CBe8C&q=hudud|access-date=19 November 2015|isbn=9781437755770}}</ref> except murder for this reason. Punishments range from public lashing to publicly stoning to death, amputation of hands and crucifixion.<ref> | |||
==Overview== | |||
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150205053324/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e757 |date=2015-02-05}} ''Oxford Dictionary of Islam'', Oxford University Press (2012)</ref> These punishments were rarely implemented in practice, however, because the evidentiary standards were often impossibly high.<ref name="jacb" /><ref name=hallaq-intro-173 /> For example, meeting ''hudud'' requirements for '']'' and theft was virtually impossible without a confession in court, which could be invalidated by a retraction.<ref name="WaelHallaq" /><ref name="jacb" /> Based on a hadith, jurists stipulated that ''hudud'' punishments should be averted by the slightest doubts or ambiguities.{{efn|''shubuhat'', sing. ''shubha''}}<ref name="WaelHallaq">{{cite book|last1=Hallaq |first1=Wael |author-link=Wael Hallaq |title=Shariah: Theory, Practice and Transformations|date=2009|publisher=]|isbn=978-0-521-86147-2|pages=311}}</ref><ref name="jacb" /> | |||
During the 19th century, Sharia-based criminal laws were replaced by statutes inspired by European models in many parts of the Islamic world, although not in particularly conservative regions such as the ].<ref name=peters-OEIW>{{cite encyclopedia|author=Rudolph Peters|title=Hudud|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World|editor=John L. Esposito|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2009|url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0322|access-date=2017-07-06|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170303015235/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0322|archive-date=2017-03-03|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name=vikor-OEIP>{{cite encyclopedia|first=Knut S.|last=Vikør|title=Sharīʿah|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Politics|publisher=Oxford University Press|editor=Emad El-Din Shahin|year=2014|url=http://bridgingcultures.neh.gov/muslimjourneys/items/show/226|access-date=2017-07-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202054116/http://bridgingcultures.neh.gov/muslimjourneys/items/show/226|archive-date=2017-02-02|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name=otto-2008>{{cite book |first1=Jan Michiel |last1=Otto |year=2008 |title=Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries: Tensions and Opportunities for Dutch and EU Foreign Policy |publisher=Amsterdam University Press |isbn=978-90-8728-048-2 |url=https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/20694/Sharia%20and%20national%20Law%20in%20Muslim%20countries.pdf |pages=18–20 |access-date=2017-07-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171009235043/https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bitstream/handle/1887/20694/Sharia%20and%20national%20Law%20in%20Muslim%20countries.pdf |archive-date=2017-10-09 |url-status=live }}</ref> The ] of the late 20th century brought along calls by ] movements for full implementation of Sharia.<ref name=vikor-OEIP /><ref>{{cite encyclopedia|first=Ann Elizabeth|last=Mayer|title=Law. Modern Legal Reform|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World|editor=John L. Esposito|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2009|url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0473|access-date=2017-07-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731040109/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0473|archive-date=2017-07-31|url-status=dead}}</ref> Reinstatement of ''hudud'' punishments has had particular symbolic importance for these groups because of their Quranic origin, and their advocates have often disregarded the stringent traditional restrictions on their application.<ref name=vikor-OEIP /> In practice, in the countries where ''hudud'' have been incorporated into the legal code under Islamist pressure, they have often been used sparingly or not at all, and their application has varied depending on local political climate.<ref name=vikor-OEIP /><ref name=otto-2008 /> Their use has been a subject of criticism and debate. | |||
Hudood is one of four categories of punishment in ]<ref>''The Constitution of Iran : politics and the state in the Islamic Republic'' / | |||
by Asghar Schirazi, London ; New York : I.B. Tauris, 1997 p.223-4</ref>: | |||
''Hudud'' is not the only form of punishment under ''Sharia''. For offenses against man—the other type of crime in Sharia—that involve inflicting bodily harm Islamic law prescribes a retaliatory punishment analogous to the crime ('']'') or monetary compensation ('']''); and for other crimes the form of punishment is left to the judge's discretion ('']'').<ref name=mdth1 /> Criminals who escaped a ''hudud'' punishment could still receive a ''ta'zir'' sentence.<ref name=peters-OEIW/> | |||
* ] - meaning retaliation, and following the principle of "an eye for an eye." | |||
* ] - compensation paid to the heirs of a victim. In Arabic the word means both blood money and ransom. | |||
* Hudud - fixed punishments | |||
* ] - punishment, usually corporal, administered at the discretion of the judge | |||
In the 21st century'','' ''hudud'', including ] of limbs, is part of the legal systems of ],<ref>{{Cite news |agency=Agence France-Presse |date=2022-11-14 |title=Afghan supreme leader orders full implementation of sharia law |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/nov/14/afghanistan-supreme-leader-orders-full-implementation-of-sharia-law-taliban |access-date=2024-02-27 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite news|title=Death by stoning for gays, amputation for theft in Brunei|work=Bangkok Post|date=27 March 2019 |url=https://www.bangkokpost.com/world/1651988/death-by-stoning-for-gays-amputation-for-theft-in-brunei|access-date=2021-11-03}}</ref> ], ],<ref>{{Cite web |title=Shariah Punishments in the Islamic Republics of Mauritania and Maldives, and Islamic State of Yemen |url=https://academic.oup.com/book/34967/chapter-abstract/298608517?redirectedFrom=fulltext |access-date=2024-03-28 |website=academic.oup.com}}</ref> ], the ],<ref>{{Cite web |title=United Arab Emirates {{!}} Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children |date=3 November 2017 |url=https://endcorporalpunishment.org/reports-on-every-state-and-territory/united-arab-emirates/ |access-date=2024-01-07 |language=en-GB}}</ref> ],<ref>{{Cite web|date=2013-09-16|title=Yemeni man sentenced to hand and foot amputation for armed robbery|url=https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2013/09/yemeni-man-sentenced-hand-and-foot-amputation-armed-robbery/|access-date=2021-11-03|website=Amnesty International|language=en}}</ref> and ] of ]. | |||
Hudud offenses are defined as "claims of God," and therefore the sovereign was held to have a responsibility to punish them. All other offenses were defined as "claims of servants," and responsibility for prosecution rested on the victim. This includes murder, which was treated as a private dispute between the murderer and the victim's heirs. The heirs are given the right to forgive the murderer, or demand compensation (see ]) or demand execution of the murderer (see ]). | |||
==Scriptural basis== | |||
Hudud offenses include:<ref name="bechor">''Between Vision and Reality: Law in the Arab World'', ], IDC Projects Publishing House, 2002. pp. 105-110</ref> | |||
''Hudud'' offenses are mentioned in the ]. The punishments for these offenses are drawn from both the ] and the ]. The ] does not define the offenses precisely: their definitions were elaborated in ] (Islamic jurisprudence). | |||
===Quran=== | |||
* ] (Sariqa, السرقة) | |||
The Qur'an describes several ''hudud'' crimes and in some cases sets out punishments.<ref name=mdth1>Silvia Tellenbach (2015), "Islamic Criminal Law", In ''The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law'' (Ed: Markus D. Dubber and Tatjana Hornle), Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0199673599}}, pp. 251-253</ref> The ''hudud'' crime of theft is referred to in Quran verse 5:38:<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
* ] (Ĥirabah, الحرابة) | |||
{{blockquote|As for male and female thieves, cut off their hands for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.|{{qref|5|38|c=y}}}} | |||
* ] (Zina', الزنا) | |||
* ] (Qadhf, القذف) <ref>Joseph Schacht, ''An Introduction to Islamic Law'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), pp. 178-181</ref> | |||
* ] (Shurb al-Khamr, شرب الخمر) | |||
*] (Irtidād or Ridda, ارتداد أو ردّه) includes ]. (Unlike the five offenses listed above, not all jurists consider apostasy to be a hudud offense.{{Citation needed|date=July 2008}}) | |||
The crime of "robbery and civil disturbance against Islam" inside a Muslim state is referred to in Quran 5:33:<ref name=mdth1/> | |||
In traditional Islamic legal systems, there were very exacting standards of proof that had to be met if hudud punishments were to be implemented. {{Citation needed|date=November 2008}} | |||
{{blockquote|Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and spread mischief in the land is death, crucifixion, cutting off their hands and feet on opposite sides, or exile from the land. This ˹penalty˺ is a disgrace for them in this world, and they will suffer a tremendous punishment in the Hereafter.|{{qref|5|33|c=y}}}} | |||
The crime of illicit consensual sex is referred to in several verses, including Quran 24:2:<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
There are minor differences in views between the four major ] '']s'' about sentencing and specifications for these laws. It is often argued that, since Sharia is God's law and states certain punishments for each crime, they are immutable. However, with ] expressing concerns about hadith validity, a major component of how Islamic law is created, questions have arisen about administering certain punishments. Incompatibilities with ] in the way Islamic law is practised in many countries has led ] to call for an international moratorium on the punishments of hudud laws until greater scholarly consensus can be reached.<ref></ref> | |||
{{blockquote|As for female and male fornicators, give each of them one hundred lashes, and do not let pity for them make you lenient in ˹enforcing˺ the law of Allah, if you ˹truly˺ believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a number of believers witness their punishment.|{{qref|24|2|c=y}}}} | |||
It has also been argued that the Hudud portion of Sharia is incompatible with ] or Western understanding of human rights. For example a ''Washington Times'' editorial called Pakistan's ]: | |||
:a set of laws passed in 1979 in response to pressure from hardline Islamic political groups that odiously punished ] victims while making it difficult to convict the perpetrators. | |||
The crime of "accusation of illicit sex against chaste women without four witnesses" and a ''hudud'' punishment is based on Quran {{qref|24|4|pl=y}}, {{qref|24|6|pl=y}}, among others Quranic verse.<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
==Punishments== | |||
{{blockquote|Those who accuse chaste women ˹of adultery˺ and fail to produce four witnesses, give them eighty lashes ˹each˺. And do not ever accept any testimony from them—for they are indeed the rebellious—|{{qref|24|4|c=y}}<ref>see also {{qref|24|6|b=y}}, {{qref|9|66}}, {{qref|16|106}}</ref>}} | |||
In brief, the punishments include: | |||
===Hadiths=== | |||
*]s - by sword/] (for highway robbery with homicide), by ] | |||
The crime of drinking alcohol is referred to in Quranic verse {{qref|5|90|pl=y}}, and ''hudud'' punishment is described in ''hadiths'':<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
*] of hands or feet (for theft and highway robbery without homicide) | |||
{{blockquote|O believers! Intoxicants, gambling, idols, and drawing lots for decisions are all evil of Satan's handiwork. So shun them so you may be successful.|{{qref|5|90|c=y}}}} | |||
*] with a varying number of strokes (for drinking, zina' when the offenders are unmarried, and false accusations of zina') | |||
The ''] ]s'', a compilation of sayings, practices and traditions of ] as observed by ], are considered by ] to be the most trusted source of Islamic law after the ]. They extensively describe ''hudud'' crimes and punishments.<ref>Elyse Semerdjian (2008), "Off the Straight Path": Illicit Sex, Law, and Community in Ottoman Aleppo, Syracuse University Press, {{ISBN|978-0815631736}}, pp. 8–14</ref><ref>Christopher Melchert (1997), ''The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law: 9th–10th Centuries CE'', Brill Academic, {{ISBN|978-9004109520}}, pp. 16 with footnote 78</ref> In some cases Islamic scholars have used hadiths to establish ''hudud'' punishments, which are not mentioned in the Quran.<ref name=mdth1/> Thus, stoning as punishment for ] is based on hadiths that narrate episodes where Muhammad and his successors prescribed it.<ref name=Semerdjian/> The tendency to use existence of a ''shubha'' (lit. doubt, uncertainty) to avoid ''hudud'' punishments is based on a hadith that states "avert ''hadd'' punishment in case of ''shubha''".<ref>Silvia Tellenbach (2015), "Islamic Criminal Law", In ''The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law'' (Ed: Markus D. Dubber and Tatjana Hornle), Oxford University Press, {{ISBN|978-0199673599}}, pp. 255</ref> | |||
The hudud punishment for theft was carried out on several hundred individuals, including Christians, during the first two years when Shari`a was made state law in ] between 1983 and 1985 and then was withdrawn from application but not from the law. Flogging for morals charges have been carried out since the codification of Islamic law in Sudan in 1991 without withdrawal from application. Although there were sentences of stoning for adultery during this period, none has been carried out. | |||
==''Hudud'' offences and punishments== | |||
== Requirements for conviction == | |||
The offences subject to ''hudud'' punishment: | |||
* ]; The main verse for implementation in Islam is ]-178: "Believers! Retaliation is ordained for you regarding the people who were killed. Free versus free, captive versus captive, woman versus woman. Whoever is forgiven by the brother of the slain for a price, let him abide by the custom and pay the price well." ] will be paid for those who do not meet the conditions for retaliation for killings. | |||
* ] ({{lang|ar-Latn|sariqa}}, السرقة). Punished with amputation of a hand.<ref name=mcb1 /><ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
* Illicit sexual intercourse ('']'', الزنا). Includes pre-marital sex and extra-marital sex.<ref>Julie Chadbourne (1999), Never wear your shoes after midnight: Legal trends under the Pakistan Zina Ordinance, ''Wisconsin International Law Journal'', Vol. 17, pp. 179–234</ref><ref>Reza Aslan (2004), "The Problem of Stoning in the Islamic Penal Code: An Argument for Reform", ''UCLA Journal of Islamic and Near East Law'', Vol 3, No. 1, pp. 91–119</ref> Classification of homosexual intercourse as zina differs according to ].<ref name="EoI_Zina" /> Although stoning for zina is not mentioned in the Quran, all schools of traditional jurisprudence agreed on the basis of ] that it is to be punished by stoning if the offender is ''{{lang|ar-Latn|muhsan}}'' (adult, free, Muslim, and married or previously married). ] is the penalty for offenders who are not muhsan, i.e. they do not meet all of the above criteria. The offenders must have acted of their own free will.<ref name="EoI_Zina" /><ref name=Semerdjian /> | |||
* False accusation of ''{{lang|ar-Latn|zina}}'' (''{{lang|ar-Latn|qadhf}}'', القذف).<ref name=mcb1 /><ref>Joseph Schacht, ''An Introduction to Islamic Law'' (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), pp. 178–181</ref> Punished by 80 lashes.<ref name=mdth1 /> (See:]) | |||
* ] (''{{lang|ar-Latn|shurb al-khamr}}'').<ref name=mcb1>M. Cherif Bassiouni (1997), {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180927005647/https://www.jstor.org/stable/3381843 |date=2018-09-27}}, ''Arab Law Quarterly'', Vol. 12, No. 3 (1997), pp. 269–286 | |||
</ref> Punished by 40 to 80 lashes, depending on the legal school.<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
'''Other situations that are considered Hudud crimes by some understandings''' | |||
Only eye-witness testimony and confession were admitted. For eye-witness testimony, the number of witnesses required was doubled from Islamic law's usual standard of two to four. Only free, adult Muslim men are eligible to testify in hudud cases. (In non-hudud cases the testimony of women, non-Muslims and slaves could be admitted in certain circumstances). A confession had to be repeated four times, the confessing person had to be in a healthy state of mind, and he or she could retract the confession at any point before punishment. | |||
* Rebellion (''{{lang|ar-Latn|baghi}}''<ref name=mdth1 />).<ref name=shah-2011-62>{{cite book|last1=Shah|first1=Niaz A.|title=Islamic Law and the Law of Armed Conflict: The Conflict in Pakistan|date=2011|publisher=Taylor & Francis|page=62 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yCT9hsALBcYC&pg=PA62|access-date=13 November 2015|isbn=9781136824685}}</ref> / '']'', ''{{lang|ar-Latn|qat' al-tariq}}'' or ]; How the verse ] 33, which describes the crime of ], should be understood is a matter of debate even today.<ref>https://ejournal.um.edu.my/index.php/JS/article/download/27993/12654/63844</ref> The verse talks about the punishment of criminals by killing, hanging, ], and being exiled from the earth, in response to an abstract crime such as "]".<ref name="AutoN0-18"/> | |||
{{Multiple image | |||
However, while these standards of proof made hudud punishments very difficult to apply in practice, an offender could still be sentenced to corporal punishment at the discretion of the judge (see ]), if he or she was found guilty but the standards of proof required for hudud punishments could not be met. | |||
| total_width = 300 | |||
| image1 = Adam Ismaeel 1986.jpg | |||
| image2 = Ibrahim Osman 1986.jpg | |||
| footer = Cross amputation survivors, Adam Ismaeel (left) and Ibrahim Osman (right), of the ] in Sudan, pictured in 1986; According to the understanding, these people must have declared war against Allah and the Prophet.}} | |||
Punished with death followed by crucifixion, amputation of the right hand and the left foot (the combined right-left double amputation procedure is known as the ancient punishment of "]") or banishment. Different punishments are prescribed for different scenarios and there are differences of opinion regarding specifics within and between legal schools.<ref name=mcb1 /><ref name=mdth1 /> Expanding or narrowing the conditions and scope of this crime according to new situations and universal standards are issues that continue to be discussed today.<ref name="AutoN0-18">{{cite journal |last1=Khasan |first1=Moh |title=From Textuality to Universality: The Evolution of Ḥirābah Crimes in Islamic Jurisprudence |journal=Al-Jami'ah: Journal of Islamic Studies |date=24 May 2021 |volume=59 |issue=1 |pages=1–32 |doi=10.14421/ajis.2021.591.1-32 |url=https://aljamiah.or.id/index.php/AJIS/article/view/59101 |access-date=16 November 2024 |language=en |issn=2338-557X|doi-access=free }}</ref> | |||
===Adultery=== | |||
The punishment of ] under Islamic law is flagging 100 lashes in public. It is mentioned in the Qur'an and also derives its authority from hadith literature references which are imputed by many. | |||
* ] (''{{lang|ar-Latn|riddah}}'', ردة or ''{{lang|ar-Latn|irtidad}}'', ارتداد), leaving Islam for another religion or for atheism,<ref>Peters & De Vries (1976), "Apostasy in Islam," ''Die Welt des Islams'', Vol. 17, Issue 1/4, pp. 1–25</ref><ref>J Rehman (2010), "Freedom of expression, apostasy, and blasphemy within Islam: Sharia, criminal justice systems, and modern Islamic state practices", ''Criminal Justice Matters'', 79(1), pp. 4–5, {{doi|10.1080/09627250903569841}}</ref> is regarded as one of ''hudud'' crimes liable to capital punishment in traditional Maliki, Hanbali and Shia jurisprudence, but not in Hanafi and Shafi'i ''fiqh'' as the hudud are a ] for the hudud offences, though these schools all regard apostasy as a grave crime and prescribe the death penalty for apostates.<ref name=mdth1 /> | |||
There are certain standards for proof that must be met in ] for this punishment to apply. In the Shafii, Hanbali, and Hanafi law schools the lashing is imposed for the married adulterer and his partner only if the crime is proven, either by four male adults eyewitnessing the actual sexual intercourse at the same time or by self-confession. In the Maliki school of law, however, evidence of pregnancy also constitutes sufficient proof. That said, a pregnant woman can never be punished in the Shariah.<ref>{{cite journal | author=Buba Iman | url=http://www.zawaj.com/qaradawi/marriage.html | journal=Jenda: A Journal of Culture and African Women Studies | volume = 1.2 (2001) | title=Safiyatu's conviction untenable under sharia|ISSN=1530-5686}}</ref> For the establishment of adultery, four witnesses "must have seen the act in its most intimate details, i.e. the penetration (like “a stick disappearing in a kohl container,” as the fiqh books specify). However they may be charged with indecency and immoral behavior. If their testimonies do not satisfy the requirements, they can be sentenced to eighty lashes for unfounded accusation of fornication." <ref name="EoI_Zina">Encyclopedia of Islam, ''Zina''</ref></blockquote> | |||
There are a number of differences in views between the different '']s'' with regard to the punishments appropriate in specific situations and the required process before they are carried out.<ref name=mdth1 /> There are also legal differences ('']'') over the term limitation of pronouncing the punishment. Hanafite scholars assert that punishment for hadd crimes other than ''qadhf'' (false accusation of illegal sex) have to be implemented within a month; except for witnesses with a valid legal justifications for delayed testimony or in cases of self-confession.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Peters |first=Rudolph |title=Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-first Century |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-521-79226-4 |location=Cambridge, UK |pages=11 |chapter=2: The Classical Doctrine}}</ref> | |||
] following ] jurisprudence generally believe that ''hudud'' punishments can be changed by appropriately qualified jurists.<ref>{{cite web|title=New Fatwas|url=http://www.hoseini.org/Esteftaat-English.htm|quote=In field of governmental chapters of Islamic Jurisprudence, the prophet and the infallible Imams and the perfect and just jurists are allowed to alter those provisions, based on the general rules of Islamic jurisprudence and according to the general interests of Islamic Umma.|access-date=September 7, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171113080359/http://www.hoseini.org/Esteftaat-English.htm|archive-date=2017-11-13|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Ayatollah Khomeini's Political Theory and Public Interest|last=Kadivar|first=Mohsen |url=https://www.aku.edu/govprogramme/papers/Documents/KADIVAR_Ayatollah%20Khomeini_ENGLISH.pdf|quote=The absolute guardianship of jurist (al-wilayat al-mutlaqah lil-faqih) is the same as the guardianship that God gave the Prophet and Imams. It is one of the most prominent shari'a ordinances (al-ahkam al-ilahiyya), that has priority over ALL shari'a ordinances.|access-date=September 7, 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170908111646/https://www.aku.edu/govprogramme/papers/Documents/KADIVAR_Ayatollah%20Khomeini_ENGLISH.pdf|archive-date=2017-09-08|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Murder, injury and property damage are not ''hudud'' crimes in ],<ref name=MPoIL-219>{{cite book|last1=Black|first1=E. Ann|last2=Esmaeili|first2=Hossein|last3=Hosen|first3=Nadirsyah|title=Modern Perspectives on Islamic Law|date=2013|publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing|page=219 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2kngBY-Gu18C&pg=PA219|access-date=5 November 2015|isbn=9780857934475}}</ref><ref>''The Constitution of Iran: Politics and the State in the Islamic Republic'' / by Asghar Schirazi, London; New York: I.B. Tauris, 1997 pp. 223–24</ref> and are subsumed under other categories of Islamic penal law in Iran which are: | |||
* ] (meaning retaliation, and following the principle of "]"), and ] ("blood money", financial compensation paid to the victim or heirs of a victim in the cases of murder, bodily harm or property damage. Diyyah is an alternative to Qisas for the same class of crimes). | |||
* ] – punishment administered at the ]. | |||
==History== | |||
Because the stringent traditional restrictions on application of ''hudud'' punishments, they were rarely applied historically.<ref name=peters-OEIW /> Criminals who escaped ''hudud'' punishments could still be sanctioned under the system of '']'', which gave judges and high officials discretionary sentencing powers to punish crimes that did not fall under the categories of ''hudud'' and '']''.<ref name=peters-OEIW /> In practice, since early on in ], criminal cases were usually handled by ruler-administered courts or local police using procedures that were only loosely related to Sharia.<ref name="calder"> | |||
{{cite encyclopedia |year=2009 |title=Law. Legal Thought and Jurisprudence |encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0473 |access-date=2017-07-04 |last=Calder |first=Norman |editor=John L. Esposito |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170731040109/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0473 |archive-date=2017-07-31 |url-status=dead}}</ref><ref name="ziadeh">{{cite encyclopedia |year=2009c |title=Criminal Law |encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0170 |access-date=2017-07-06 |last=Ziadeh |first=Farhat J. |editor=John L. Esposito |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170505020530/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0170 |archive-date=2017-05-05 |url-status=dead}}</ref> During the 19th century, Sharia-based criminal laws were replaced by statutes inspired by European models nearly everywhere in the Islamic world, except some particularly conservative regions such as the Arabian peninsula.<ref name=peters-OEIW /> | |||
], ] (1970s)]] | |||
Under pressure from Islamist movements, recent decades have witnessed re-introduction of ''hudud'' punishments and by 2013 about a dozen of the 50 or so Muslim-majority countries had made ''hudud'' applicable,<ref>] (map)</ref> many countries have disregarded traditional strict requirements. In 1979 ] instituted the ]. In July 1980 ] stoned to death four offenders in ]. By the late 1980s, ] and ] had "enacted laws to grant courts the power to hand down hadd penalties". During the 1990s ], ], ], and northern ] followed suit. In 1994 the ]i president ] (who had persecuted and executed many Islamists), issued a decree "ordering that robbers and car thieves should lose their hands".{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=220}} ] adopted hudud laws in 2014.<ref> | |||
''Time'' (May 27, 2014)</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Lau|first1=Martin|title=Twenty-Five Years of Hudood Ordinances - A Review|journal=Washington and Lee Law Review|date=1 September 2007|volume=64|issue=4|pages=1291–1314|url=http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol64/iss4/2|access-date=2015-02-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150203235449/http://scholarlycommons.law.wlu.edu/wlulr/vol64/iss4/2/|archive-date=2015-02-03|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Enforcement of ''hudud'' punishments has varied from country to country. In Pakistan and ], ''hudud'' punishments have not been applied at all because of strict requirements.<ref name=peters-OEIW/> In Nigeria local courts have passed several stoning sentences for zina, all of which were overturned on appeal and left unenforced because of lack of enough evidence.<ref>{{cite book|author= Gunnar J. Weimann|title=Islamic Criminal Law in Northern Nigeria: Politics, Religion, Judicial Practice|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=2joqx6vG74cC&pg=PA77|page=77|publisher=Amsterdam University Press|year=2010 |isbn=9789056296551}}</ref> | |||
During the first two years when Sharia was made state law in Sudan (1983 and 1985), a ''hudud'' punishment for theft was inflicted on some criminals, and then discontinued though not repealed. Floggings for moral crimes have been carried out since the codification of Islamic law in Sudan in 1991 and continue. In 2012 a Sudanese court sentenced Intisar Sharif Abdallah, a teenager, to death by stoning in the city of Omdurman under article 146 of Sudan's Criminal Act after charging her with "adultery with a married person". She was held in Omdurman prison with her legs shackled, along with her 5-month-old baby.<ref> | |||
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170115051102/https://www.hrw.org/news/2012/05/31/sudan-ban-death-stoning |date=2017-01-15}} Human Rights Watch (May 31, 2012) | |||
</ref> (She was released on July 3, 2012 after an international outcry.<ref name=sudanttib>{{cite news|title=Amnesty: SUDANESE MOTHER WALKS FREE|url=http://sudantribune.com/spip.php?article43152|access-date=5 November 2015|work=Sudan Tribune|date=5 July 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151117022406/http://sudantribune.com/spip.php?article43152|archive-date=2015-11-17|url-status=live}}</ref>) | |||
The ''hudud'' punishment for '']'' in cases of consensual sex and the punishment of rape victims who failed to prove the coercion, which has occurred in some countries, have been the subject of a global human rights debate.<ref>KUGLE (2003), "Sexuality, diversity and ethics in the agenda of progressive Muslims," In: SAFI, O. (Ed.). ''Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism'', Oxford: Oneworld. pp. 190–234</ref><ref>LAU, M. (2007), "Twenty-Five Years of Hudood Ordinances: A Review," ''Washington and Lee Law Review'', n. 64, pp. 1291-1314</ref><ref>Kecia Ali (2006), ''Sexual Ethics and Islam'', {{ISBN|978-1851684564}}, Chapter 4. {{Page needed|date=November 2015}}</ref> In Pakistan many rape victims who have failed to prove accusations have been jailed this has been criticized as leading to "hundreds of incidents where a woman subjected to rape, or gang rape, were eventually accused of ''zināʾ''" and incarcerated.<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.hrcp-web.org/NCSW_Report.cfm |title=National Commission on the status of women's report on Hudood Ordinance 1979 |access-date=2015-02-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071229095410/http://www.hrcp-web.org/NCSW_Report.cfm |archive-date=2007-12-29 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Kennedy states that majority of cases against women jailed on charges of zina in Pakistan are filed by their family members against disobedient daughters and estranged wives as harassment suits. Hundreds of women in Afghanistan jails are victims of rape or domestic violence, accused of zina under tazir.<ref name=hrwafghan> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150203214204/http://www.hrw.org/features/afghanistan-moral-crimes |date=2015-02-03}} Human Rights Watch (2012); Quote "Some women and girls have been convicted of zina, sex outside of marriage, after being raped or forced into prostitution. Zina is a crime under Afghan law, punishable by up to 15 years in prison."</ref> In Pakistan, over 200,000 ''zina'' cases against women under the Hudood laws were under way at various levels in Pakistan's legal system in 2005.<ref name=hrwpakistan> | |||
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160307043029/https://www.hrw.org/legacy/wr2k5/pdf/pakist.pdf |date=2016-03-07}} Human Rights Watch (2005) | |||
</ref> In addition to thousands of women in prison awaiting trial for ''zina''-related charges, rape victims in Pakistan have been reluctant to report rape because they feared being charged with ''zina''.<ref>Rahat Imran (2005), "Legal Injustices: The Zina Hudood Ordinance of Pakistan and Its Implications for Women," ''Journal of International Women's Studies'', Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 78–100</ref> The resulting controversy prompted the law to be amended in 2006, though the amended version has been criticized for continuing to blur the legal distinction between rape and consensual sex.<ref name=Semerdjian /> | |||
Crucifixion in Islam, at least in ], takes the form of displaying beheaded remains of a perpetrator "for a few hours on top of a pole".{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=235}} They are far fewer in number than executions.<ref name=prtbbcsa /> One case was that of Muhammad Basheer al-Ranally who was executed and crucified on December 7, 2009 for "spreading disorder in the land" by kidnapping, raping and murdering several young boys.<ref name=prtbbcsa>{{cite news|title=Paedophile rapist to be beheaded and crucified in Saudi Arabia|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/paedophile-rapist-to-be-beheaded-and-crucified-in-saudi-arabia-1814475.html|access-date=19 November 2015|work=The Independent|date=22 October 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151119084219/http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/paedophile-rapist-to-be-beheaded-and-crucified-in-saudi-arabia-1814475.html|archive-date=2015-11-19|url-status=live}}</ref> ISIS has also reportedly crucified prisoners.<ref name=Nebehay>{{cite news|last1=Nebehay |first1=Stephanie|title=ISIS Reportedly Crucified, Buried Children Alive In Iraq: UN|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/04/isis-crucified-children_n_6613578.html |access-date=19 November 2015|agency=Reuters|date=2015-02-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151119144049/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/04/isis-crucified-children_n_6613578.html |archive-date=2015-11-19|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
==Requirements for conviction== | |||
===Illegal sex=== | |||
{{Main|Zina}} | |||
There are certain standards for proof that must be met in ] for ''zina'' punishment to apply. In the Shafii, Hanbali, and Hanafi law schools ] (public stoning) or lashing is imposed for religiously prohibited sex only if the crime is proven, either by four male adults witnessing at first hand the actual sexual intercourse at the same time or by self-confession.<ref name=zmh11/> For the establishment of adultery, four male Muslim witnesses must have seen the act in its most intimate details. Shia Islam allows substitution of one male Muslim with two female Muslims, but requires that at least one of the witnesses be a male. The Sunni ] school of law consider pregnancy in an unmarried woman as sufficient evidence of ''zina'', unless there is evidence of rape or compulsion.<ref name=zmh11>Z. Mir-Hosseini (2011), "Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts," ''SUR-International Journal on Human Rights'', 8(15), pp. 7–33</ref><ref>Camilla Adang (2003), "Ibn Hazam on Homosexuality," ''Al Qantara'', Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 5–31</ref> The punishment can be averted by a number of legal "doubts" (''shubuhat''), however, such as existence of an invalid marriage contract or possibility that the conception predates a divorce.<ref name="EoI_Zina">{{Cite encyclopedia|first=R. |last=Peters |year=2012 |title=Zinā or Zināʾ |encyclopedia=Encyclopaedia of Islam| edition=2nd|publisher=Brill |editor=P. Bearman |editor2=Th. Bianquis |editor3=C.E. Bosworth |editor4=E. van Donzel |editor5=W.P. Heinrichs|doi= 10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_8168}}</ref> The majority Maliki opinion theoretically allowed for a pregnancy lasting up to seven years, indicating a concern of the jurists to shield women from the charge of ''zina'' and to protect children from the stigma of illegitimacy.<ref name=zmh11 /> These requirements made zina virtually impossible to prove in practice.<ref name=Semerdjian>{{cite encyclopedia |first=Elyse |last=Semerdjian |title=Zinah |encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World |editor=John L. Esposito |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford |year=2009 |url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195305135.001.0001/acref-9780195305135-e-0984|url-access=subscription |isbn=9780195305135 |access-date=2017-07-04}}</ref> | |||
If a person alleges ''zina'' and fails to provide four consistent Muslim witnesses, or if witnesses provide inconsistent testimonies, they can be sentenced to eighty lashes for unfounded accusation of fornication ('']''), itself a ''hadd'' crime."<ref name="EoI_Zina"/> Rape was traditionally prosecuted under legal categories requiring less stringent evidentiary rules.<ref name=aquraishi>A. Quraishi (1999), "Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina," ''Islamic studies'', Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403–431</ref> In Pakistan, the ] of 1979 subsumed prosecution of rape under the category of zina, making rape extremely difficult to prove and exposing the victims to jail sentences for admitting illicit intercourse.<ref name=Semerdjian /> The resulting controversy prompted the law to be amended in 2006, though the amended version is still criticized by some for blurring the legal distinction between rape and consensual sex.<ref name=Semerdjian /> | |||
===Theft=== | ===Theft=== | ||
Malik, the originator of the Maliki judicial school of thought, recorded in |
], the originator of the ] judicial school of thought, recorded in of many detailed circumstances under which the punishment of hand cutting should and should not be carried out. | ||
Commenting on the verse |
Commenting on the verse in the Quran on theft, ] says that most Islamic jurists believe that "petty thefts are exempt from this punishment" and that "only one hand should be cut off for the first theft."<ref>{{cite book |last=Ali |first=Abdullah Yusuf |title=The Meaning Of The Holy Qur'an |year=2004 |publisher=Amana Publications |isbn=978-1-59008-025-2 |page=259|edition=11th }}</ref> Islamic jurists disagree as to when amputation is mandatory religious punishment.<ref>{{cite book |author=Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi |title=The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2 |year=2000|publisher=Islamic Publications |page=451}}</ref> This is a fatwa given by ] (d. 756/1356), a senior Shafi scholar and judge from one of the leading scholarly families of Damascus: | ||
The Imam and Shaykh said: It has been agreed upon that the ''Hadd'' is obligatory for one who has committed theft and : | |||
{{blockquote|text= | |||
# was taken from a place generally considered secure (''ḥirz'') | |||
# it had not been procured as spoils of war (''mughannam'') | |||
# nor from the public treasury | |||
# and it was taken by his own hand | |||
# not by some tool or mechanism (''āla'') | |||
# on his own | |||
# solely | |||
# while he was of sound mind | |||
# and of age | |||
# and a Muslim | |||
# and free | |||
# not in the ] | |||
# in Mecca | |||
# and not in the ] | |||
# and he is not one who is granted access to it from time to time | |||
# and he stole from someone other than his wife | |||
# and not from a uterine relative | |||
# and not from her husband if it is a woman | |||
# when he was not drunk | |||
# and not compelled by hunger | |||
# or under duress | |||
# and he stole some property that was owned | |||
# and would be permissible to sell to Muslims | |||
# and he stole it from someone who had not wrongfully appropriated it | |||
# and the value of what he stole reached three dirhams | |||
# of pure silver | |||
# by the Meccan weight | |||
# and it was not meat | |||
# or any slaughtered animal | |||
# nor anything edible | |||
# or potable | |||
# or some fowl | |||
# or game | |||
# or a dog | |||
# or a cat | |||
# or animal dung | |||
# or feces (''ʿadhira'') | |||
# or dirt | |||
# or red ochre (''maghara'') | |||
# or arsenic (''zirnīkh'') | |||
# or pebbles | |||
# or stones | |||
# or glass | |||
# or coals | |||
# or firewood | |||
# or reeds (''qaṣab'') | |||
# or wood | |||
# or fruit | |||
# or a donkey | |||
# or a grazing animal | |||
# or a copy of the Quran | |||
# or a plant pulled up from its roots (''min badā'ihi'') | |||
# or produce from a walled garden | |||
# or a tree | |||
# or a free person | |||
# or a slave | |||
# if they are able to speak and are of sound mind | |||
# and he had committed no offense against him | |||
# before he removed him from a place where he had not been permitted to enter | |||
# from his secure location | |||
# by his own hand | |||
# and witness is born | |||
# to all of the above | |||
# by two witnesses | |||
# who are men | |||
# according to that we already presented in the chapter on testimony | |||
# and they did not disagree | |||
# or retract their testimony | |||
# and the thief did not claim that he was the rightful owner of what he stole | |||
# and his left hand is healthy | |||
# and his foot is healthy | |||
# and neither body part is missing anything | |||
# and the person he stole from does not give him what he had stolen as a gift | |||
# and he did not become the owner of what he stole after he stole it | |||
# and the thief did not return the stolen item to the person he stole it from | |||
# and the thief did not claim it | |||
# and the thief was not owed a debt by the person he stole from equal to the value of what he stole | |||
# and the person stolen from is present | |||
# and he made a claim for the stolen property | |||
# and requested that amputation occur | |||
# before the thief could repent | |||
# and the witnesses to the theft are present | |||
# and a month had not passed since the theft occurred}} | |||
All of this was said by ʿAlī b. Aḥmad b. Saʿīd (probably ], d. 1064). And the Imam and Shaykh added: and it is also on the condition that confession not precede the testimony and then after it he retracts . For if the thief does that first and then direct evidence (''bayyina'') is provided of his crime and then he retracts his confession, the punishment of amputation is dropped according to the more correct opinion in the Shafi school, because the establishment came by confession not by the direct evidence. So his retraction is accepted.<ref>], ''Fatāwā al-Subkī'', vol. 2, pp. 333–334. (]: Dār al-Maʿrifah) ()</ref><ref>Jonathan Brown, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160731002157/http://almadinainstitute.org/blog/the-shariah-homosexuality-safeguarding-each-others-rights-in-a-pluralist-so#Appendix |date=2016-07-31}}</ref> | |||
== Explanations for punishments == | |||
] explains that some Muslims justify these punishments in general terms because they punish crimes that are "against God and a threat to the moral fabric of the Muslim community." He observes that Islamic law provides strict regulations regarding evidence in cases involving these crimes, and that false accusations are seriously punished.<ref>{{cite book | last=Esposito | first=John L. | title=What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam| publisher=Oxford University Press | pages=150, 151 | year=2002 | isbn=0-19-515713-3}}</ref> Esposito also observes that Muslim reformers have argued that "these punishment were appropriate within the historical and social contexts in which they originated but are inappropriate today and that the underlying religious principles and values need to find new expression in modernizing societies."<ref>{{cite book | last=Esposito | first=John L. | title=What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam| publisher=Oxford University Press | year=2002 | isbn=0-19-515713-3 | page=151}}</ref> | |||
==Efficacy== | |||
] believes that "such penalties may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad lived. However, as societies have since progressed and become more peaceful and ordered, they are not suitable any longer." Gerhard Endress, professor of Islamic Studies at Ruhr University, states that at the time of advent of Islam, several social reforms happened in which a new system of marriage and family, including legal restrictions such as restriction of the practice of polygamy, was built up. Endress says that "it was only by this provision (''backed up by severe punishment for adultery''), that the family, the core of any sedentary society could be placed on a firm footing." <ref>Gerhard Endress, Islam: An Introduction to Islam, Columbia University Press, 1988, p.31</ref> | |||
===Amputation=== | |||
Those arguing in favor of that the hudud punishment of amputation for theft often describe the visceral horror/fear of losing a hand as providing strong deterrence against theft, while at the same time the numerous requirements for its application make it seldom used and thus more humane than other punishments. Supporters include Abdel-Halim Mahmoud, the rector of Azhar from 1973 to 1978, who stated it was not only ordained by God but when implemented by ] in Saudi Arabia brought law and order to his land — though amputation was carried out only seven times. | |||
<ref name=brown-150-1>{{cite book|last1=Brown|first1=Jonathan A.C.|author-link=Jonathan A.C. Brown|title=Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy|date=2014|publisher=]|isbn=978-1780744209|url=https://archive.org/details/misquotingmuhamm0000brow/page/150|access-date=4 June 2018|ref=JACBMM2014|pages=}}</ref> In his popular book ''Islam the Misunderstood Religion'', ] asserts that amputation punishment for theft "has been executed only six times throughout a period of four hundred years".<ref name="ItMR-MQ-99">{{cite book |last1=Qutb |first1=Muhammad |title=Islam, the Misunderstood Religion |page=99 |edition=6th |url=https://archive.org/details/IslamTheMisunderstoodReligion.pdf |access-date=13 June 2018}}</ref> | |||
However, according to historian Jonathan A.C. Brown, at least in the mid-1100s in the Iraqi city of ] the Muslim jurists found the punishment less than effective. Faced with a crime wave of theft the ulama "begged their new sultan ... to implement harsh punishments" outside of sharia. The hands of arrested thieves were not being cut off because evidentiary standards were so strict, nor were they deterred by the ten lashes (discretionary punishment or ]) that Shariah courts were limited to by ].<ref name=brown-150-1/><ref>David Ayalon, 'The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan: a Reexamination (Part C2)` ''Studia Islamica'' 38 (1973), pp.124–125</ref> | |||
See above section on ] for an examination of the requirement of proof of same. | |||
==Disputes and debates over reform== | |||
Commenting on the verses related to amputation of the limbs of ], Maududi writes that "here and at other places the Qur'an merely declares that sodomy is such a heinous sin... that it is the duty of the Islamic State to eradicate this crime and... punish those who are guilty of it." <ref>{{cite book | author=Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi | title=The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2 | pages=48–52 | year=2000 | publisher=Islamic Publications}}</ref> | |||
] against stonings of women in ] (2012)]] | |||
A number of scholars/reformers<ref name=watt-31>] quoted in Gerhard Endress, ''Islam: An Introduction to Islam'', Columbia University Press, 1988, p. 31</ref><ref name=esposito-2002-151>reformers cited by Esposito {{cite book |last=Esposito |first=John L. |title=What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam|url=https://archive.org/details/whateveryoneneed00espo |url-access=limited |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-19-515713-0 |page=}}</ref> have suggested that traditional ''hudud'' penalties "may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad lived" but are no longer,<ref name=watt-31/> or that "new expression" for "the underlying religious principles and values" of Hudud should be developed.<ref name=esposito-2002-151/> ] has called for an international moratorium on the punishments of ''hudud'' laws until greater scholarly consensus can be reached.<ref> | |||
{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151029031903/http://tariqramadan.com/blog/2005/04/05/an-international-call-for-moratorium-on-corporal-punishment-stoning-and-the-death-penalty-in-the-islamic-world/ |date=2015-10-29}} tariqramadan.com. 2005 April 5</ref> | |||
Many contemporary Muslim scholars think that the ''hudud'' punishments are not absolute obligations as it is an act of ''mu'amalah'' (non-worship), thus, they think that ''hudud'' is the maximum punishment.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://artikula.id/muhammadrafi19/teori-hudud-muhammad-shahrur/ | title=Teori Hudud Muhammad Shahrur | date=14 June 2019 }}</ref> | |||
There is a movement among some modern liberal Muslims to "re-interpret Islamic verses about ancient punishments," in the words of Professor ]. He states that the punishments laid down fourteen centuries ago "had to be truly severe enough to be a deterrent" in their day, but "since then God has taught us more about crime, its causes, the methods of its investigation, the limits of guilt, and the much wider range of possible punishments."<ref>{{cite web | last = Mazrui | first = Ali A. | url=http://igcs.binghamton.edu/igcs_site/dirton27.htm | title = Liberal Islam versus Moderate Islam: Elusive Moderation and the Siege Mentality | accessdate = 2006-07-03}}</ref> | |||
{{see also|Criticism_of_the_Qur'an#Severe_punishments}} | |||
''Hudud'' punishments have been called incompatible with international norms of human rights and sometimes simple justice. At least one observer (Sadakat Kadri) has complained that the inspiration of faith has not been a guarantee of justice, citing as an example the execution of ] for "waging war against God" ('']'') in the Islamic Republic of Iran—the dissidents waging war by organizing unarmed political protests.{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=234}}<ref name=rferl-1-28-2010>{{cite news|last1=Esfandiari|first1=Golnaz|title=Iran Hangs Two Sentenced In Postelection Trials|url=http://www.rferl.org/content/Iran_Executes_Two_Over_Election_Unrest/1941862.html |access-date=19 November 2015|agency=rferl|date=January 28, 2010|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151120020926/http://www.rferl.org/content/Iran_Executes_Two_Over_Election_Unrest/1941862.html|archive-date=2015-11-20|url-status=live}} | |||
== See also == | |||
</ref> The Hudood Ordinance in Pakistan led to the jailing of thousands of women on zina-related charges, were used to file "nuisance or harassment suits against disobedient daughters or estranged wives".<ref name="CKILE1996: 64">]: p.64</ref> The sentencing to death of women in Pakistan, Nigeria, Sudan for zina caused international uproar,<ref name=Puniyani-2005-197>{{cite book|last1=Puniyani|first1=Ram|title=Religion, Power and Violence: Expression of Politics in Contemporary Times|date=2005|publisher=SAGE|page=197|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Fd5Fm79VMk8C&pg=PA197|access-date=19 November 2015|isbn=9780761933380}}</ref> being perceived as not only as too harsh, but an "odious"<ref> {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070314193531/http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20061116-090021-3966r.htm |date=2007-03-14}} ''The Washington Times''</ref> punishment of victims not wrongdoers. | |||
Among the questions critics have raised about the modern application of hudud, include: why, if the seventh-century practice is divine law eternally valid and not to be reformed, have its proponents instituted modern innovations? These include use of general anesthetic for amputation (in Libya, along with instruction to hold off if amputation might "prove dangerous to health"), selective introduction (leaving out crucifixion in Libya and Pakistan), using gunfire to expedite death during stoning (in Pakistan).{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=217}} Another question is why they have been so infrequently applied both historically and recently. There is only one record of a stoning in the entire history of Ottoman Empire, and none at all in Syria during Muslim rule.{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=217}} Modern states that "have so publicly enshrined them over the past few decades have gone to great lengths to avoid their imposition." There was only one amputation apiece in Northern Nigeria and Libya,{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=232}} no stonings in Nigeria. In Pakistan the "country's medical profession collectively refused to supervise amputations throughout the 1980s", and "more than three decades of official Islamization have so far failed to produce a single actual stoning or amputation."{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=225}}{{#tag:ref|The courts of Pakistan have avoided enforcement of the hadd penalties entirely, extrajudicial lynchings and guerilla activity notwithstanding. Colonel Qaddafi's Libya conducted just one official amputation, in a 2003 case involving a four-man robbery gang. Northern Nigeria has claimed about the same number of hand in total, ... has not carried out any stonings at all. ...{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=232}}|group=Note}} (Saudi Arabia is the exception with four stonings and 45 amputations during the 1980s though they were overturned because of lack of required evidence.{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=232}}) | |||
Among two of the leading Islamist movements, the ] has taken "a distinctly ambivalent approach" toward ''hudud'' penalties with "practical plans to put them into effect ... given a very low priority;" and in Pakistan, ], then ''Ameer'' (leader) of the ], has stated that "unless and until we get a just society, the question of punishment is just a footnote."{{sfn|Kadri|2012|p=235}} | |||
Supporting ''hudud'' punishments are Islamic revivalists such as ]<ref>{{cite book |author=Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi |title=The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2 |pages=48–52 |year=2000 |publisher=Islamic Publications}}</ref> who writes that in a number of places the Quran "declares that sodomy is such a heinous sin ... that it is the duty of the Islamic State to eradicate this crime and ... punish those who are guilty of it." According to Richard Terrill, ''hudud'' punishments are considered claims of God, revealed through Muhammad, and as such immutable, unable to be altered or abolished by people, jurists or parliament.<ref>Richard Terrill (2012), ''World Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey'', Routledge, {{ISBN|978-1455725892}}, pp. 557–558</ref> | |||
Opposition to hudud (or at least minimizing of hudud) within the framework of Islam comes in more than one form. Some (such as elements of the MB and JI mentioned above) support making its application wait for the creation of a "just society" where people are not "driven to steal in order to survive."<ref name=Esposito-IRR-2000>{{cite web|last1=Esposito|first1=John L.|title=Contemporary Islam: Reformation or Revolution?|url=http://acc.teachmideast.org/texts.php?module_id=2&reading_id=211&sequence=10|website=Arab Culture and Civilization |publisher=Oxford University Press|access-date=19 November 2015|date=2000|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151120102008/http://acc.teachmideast.org/texts.php?module_id=2&reading_id=211&sequence=10|archive-date=2015-11-20|url-status=live}}</ref> Another follows the ] approach calling for ''hudud'' and other parts of Sharia to be re-interpreted from the classical form and follow broad guidelines rather than exact all-encompassing prescriptions.<ref name=Afsaruddin-2010-chpt-3 /><ref name=Shahrur /> Others consider hudud punishments "essentially deterrent in nature" to be applied very, very infrequently.<ref name=Afsaruddin-2010-chpt-3>{{cite book|last1=Afsaruddin |first1=Asma |editor1-last=Christoffersen|editor1-first=Lisbet|editor2-last=Nielsen|editor2-first=Jørgen S|title=Shari'a As Discourse: Legal Traditions and the Encounter with Europe|date=2010 |publisher=Ashgate Publishing, Ltd..|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xPF6BgAAQBAJ&pg=PT74|access-date=19 November 2015|chapter=3|isbn=9781409497028 }}</ref><ref name=Shahrur>{{cite book|last1=Shahrur|first1=Muhammad|title=The Quran Morality and Critical Reasoning|url=http://shahrour.org/wp-content/gallery/Books/booke.pdf|access-date=19 November 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306102553/http://shahrour.org/wp-content/gallery/Books/booke.pdf|archive-date=2016-03-06|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
Others (particularly ]) propose excluding ahadith and using only verses in the Quran in formulating Islamic Law, which would exclude stoning (though not amputation, flogging or execution for some crimes).<ref name="Schulte">Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban, Martha Schulte-Nafeh, ''Quran: A Reformist Translation,'' Brainbow Press, 2007</ref><ref name="The Qur'anists">Aisha Y. Musa, {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171112212406/http://www.academia.edu/1035742/The_Quranists |date=2017-11-12}}, Florida International University, accessed May 22, 2013. | |||
</ref><ref name=neal85-89 /><ref>{{cite web |last=Mazrui |first=Ali A. |url=http://igcs.binghamton.edu/igcs_site/dirton27.htm |title=Liberal Islam versus Moderate Islam: Elusive Moderation and the Siege Mentality |access-date=2006-07-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060506023318/http://igcs.binghamton.edu/igcs_site/dirton27.htm |archive-date=2006-05-06 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The vast majority of Muslims<ref name="The Qur'anists" /> and most Islamic scholars, however, consider both Quran and ] hadiths<ref name=neal85-89/> to be a valid source of Sharia, with Quranic verse 33.21, among others,<ref>{{qref|3|32|b=y}}, {{qref|3|132}}, {{qref|4|59}}, {{qref|8|20}}, {{qref|33|66}}</ref><ref name=mqz>Muhammad Qasim Zaman (2012), ''Modern Islamic Thought in a Radical Age'', Cambridge University Press, {{ISBN|978-1107096455}}, pp. 30–31</ref> as justification for this belief.<ref name=neal85-89>Neal Robinson (2013), ''Islam: A Concise Introduction'', Routledge, {{ISBN|978-0878402243}}, Chapter 7, pp. 85–89</ref> | |||
{{blockquote|Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example for whoever has hope in Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah often. ...It is not for a believing man or woman—when Allah and His Messenger decree a matter—to have any other choice in that matter. Indeed, whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has clearly gone ˹far˺ astray.|{{qref|33|21-36|c=y}}}} | |||
==See also== | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | * ] | ||
* ] | |||
* ] | * ] | ||
* ] | * ] | ||
==Notes== | |||
== Further reading == | |||
{{reflist|group=Note}} | |||
* Muhammad Ata Alsid Sidahmad, ''The Hudud: the seven specific crimes in Islamic criminal law and their mandatory punishments''. ISBN 983-9303-00-7 | |||
{{notelist}} | |||
* Chris Horrie C. and Chippindale P. ''What Is Islam?'' Virgin Books, 2003. ISBN 0-7535-0827-3 | |||
== |
==References== | ||
{{ |
{{Reflist|30em}} | ||
==Sources== | |||
== External links == | |||
* {{cite book|last1=Kadri|first1=Sadakat|title=Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia to the Streets of the Modern Muslim World |date=2012 |publisher=Macmillan|isbn=9780099523277|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ztCRZOhJ10wC}} | |||
* (of Pakistan) | |||
* {{cite book|last1=Kennedy|first1=Charles|title=Islamization of Laws and Economy, Case Studies on Pakistan|date=1996|publisher=Institute of Policy Studies, The Islamic Foundation|ref=CKILE}} | |||
* | |||
* by Dr. Mohammad Omar Farooq | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* - November 17, 2006 editorial in the ''Washington Times'' | |||
* | |||
*, ] | |||
==Further reading== | |||
Sharia and Islamism in Sudan: Conflict, law and social transformation, Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban, 2011. London: I.B. Tauris. | |||
===Short overviews=== | |||
* {{cite encyclopedia|author=Rudolph Peters|title=Hudud|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World|editor=John L. Esposito|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2009|url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0322|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091223203803/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t236/e0322|url-status=dead|archive-date=December 23, 2009}} | |||
* {{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law|editor=Markus D. Dubber |editor2=Tatjana Hörnle|author=Silvia Tellenbach|title=Islamic Criminal Law|year=2014}} | |||
* M. Cherif Bassiouni (1997), "Crimes and the Criminal Process," ''Arab Law Quarterly'', Vol. 12, No. 3 (1997), pp. 269–286 {{JSTOR|3381843}} | |||
===General references=== | |||
* {{cite book|first=Knut S.|last=Vikør|year=2005 |title=Between God and the Sultan: A History of Islamic Law|url=https://archive.org/details/betweengodsultan0000vikr|url-access=registration|publisher=Oxford University Press }} | |||
* {{cite book |first=Rudolph|last=Peters|year=2006 |title=Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century|publisher=Cambridge University Press}} | |||
* {{cite book|author=Wael B. Hallaq|author-link=Wael Hallaq|title=Sharī'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations|year=2009|publisher=Cambridge University Press}} | |||
* {{cite book|author=Olaf Köndgen|author-link=Olaf Köndgen|title=A Bibliography of Islamic Criminal Law|year=2022|publisher=Brill}} | |||
===Specific topics=== | |||
* {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190819115546/http://karamah.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/Zina-Rape-and-Islamic-Law-An-Islamic-Legal-Analysis-of-the-Rape-Laws-in-Pakistan1.pdf |date=2019-08-19 }} A Position Paper by KARAMAH: Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights | |||
* A. Quraishi (1999), "Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina," ''Islamic studies'', Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403–431 {{JSTOR|20837050}} | |||
* "Punishment in Islamic Law: A Critique of the Hudud Bill of Kelantan, Malaysia," Mohammad Hashim Kamali, ''Arab Law Quarterly'', Vol. 13, No. 3 (1998), pp. 203–234 {{JSTOR|3382008}} | |||
* "Islamization and Legal Reform in Malaysia: The Hudud Controversy of 1992," Maria Luisa Seda-Poulin, ''Southeast Asian Affairs'' (1993), pp. 224–242 {{JSTOR|27912077}} | |||
* "Criminal Justice under Shari'ah in the 21st Century—An Inter-Cultural View," Michael Bohlander and Mohammad M. Hedayati-Kakhki, ''Arab Law Quarterly'', Vol. 23, No. 4 (2009), pp. 417–436 {{JSTOR|/40604767}} | |||
* "Islamization in Sudan: A Critical Assessment," Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban, ''Middle East Journal'', Vol. 44, No. 4 (Autumn, 1990), pp. 610–623 {{JSTOR|4328193}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 19:22, 8 January 2025
Category of prescribed punishments in Islamic law This article is about the concept in Islamic law. For the series of laws concerning this topic in Pakistan, see Hudood Ordinances. "Hadd" redirects here. For other uses, see HADD (disambiguation).
Hudud (Arabic: حدود) is an Arabic word meaning "borders, boundaries, limits". In classical Islamic literature, punishments are mainly of three types; Qisas-diya, hudud and Ta'zeer. Hudud covers the punishments given to people who exceed the limits associated with the Quran and deemed to be set by Allah (Hududullah is a phrase repeated several times in the Quran without labeling any type of crime), and in this respect it differs from Ta'zeer (Arabic: تعزير, lit. 'penalty'). These punishments were applied in pre-modern Islam, and their use in some modern states has been a source of controversy.
The only crimes for which the punishment is determined in the Quran consists of murder, adultery, slander and theft. Jurists have differed as to whether apostasy from Islam and rebellion against a lawful Islamic ruler stated as hiraba are hudud crimes. Although hiraba along with the way of punishment is mentioned in the Quran, it is narrated that Muhammad applied retaliation, which is a method based on the Quran, for a similar situation, not what is stated in the relevant (5:33) verse. While apostates from religion are only condemned in the Quran - apart from otherworldly punishments - and are asked to "not accept their testimony forever", the classical understanding of sharia punishes them with death and some understandings also accept acts of nonworship such as "abandoning prayer and alms" as apostasy. (See:Ridda wars) Another examples whose punishments are not specified include 80 lashes for drinking alcohol and stoning to death for adultery of married people. Again, some understandings tend to add homosexual relationships to these crimes, which are defined as an evil act in the Qur'an with an undefined response such as "torment them" (4ː16).
Traditional Islamic jurisprudence (Arabic: فقه, romanized: fiqh) divides crimes into offenses against God (Arabic: جرائم ضد الله) and those against man (Arabic: جرائم ضد الناس). The former are seen to violate God's hudud or "boundaries", and they are associated with punishments specified in the Qur'an and in some cases inferred from ahadith. Hudud crimes cannot be pardoned by the victim or by the state, and the punishments must be carried out in public except murder for this reason. Punishments range from public lashing to publicly stoning to death, amputation of hands and crucifixion. These punishments were rarely implemented in practice, however, because the evidentiary standards were often impossibly high. For example, meeting hudud requirements for zina and theft was virtually impossible without a confession in court, which could be invalidated by a retraction. Based on a hadith, jurists stipulated that hudud punishments should be averted by the slightest doubts or ambiguities.
During the 19th century, Sharia-based criminal laws were replaced by statutes inspired by European models in many parts of the Islamic world, although not in particularly conservative regions such as the Arabian peninsula. The Islamic revival of the late 20th century brought along calls by Islamist movements for full implementation of Sharia. Reinstatement of hudud punishments has had particular symbolic importance for these groups because of their Quranic origin, and their advocates have often disregarded the stringent traditional restrictions on their application. In practice, in the countries where hudud have been incorporated into the legal code under Islamist pressure, they have often been used sparingly or not at all, and their application has varied depending on local political climate. Their use has been a subject of criticism and debate.
Hudud is not the only form of punishment under Sharia. For offenses against man—the other type of crime in Sharia—that involve inflicting bodily harm Islamic law prescribes a retaliatory punishment analogous to the crime (qisas) or monetary compensation (diya); and for other crimes the form of punishment is left to the judge's discretion (ta'zir). Criminals who escaped a hudud punishment could still receive a ta'zir sentence.
In the 21st century, hudud, including amputation of limbs, is part of the legal systems of Afghanistan, Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, and northern part of Nigeria.
Scriptural basis
Hudud offenses are mentioned in the Quran. The punishments for these offenses are drawn from both the Quran and the Sunnah. The Quran does not define the offenses precisely: their definitions were elaborated in fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence).
Quran
The Qur'an describes several hudud crimes and in some cases sets out punishments. The hudud crime of theft is referred to in Quran verse 5:38:
As for male and female thieves, cut off their hands for what they have done—a deterrent from Allah. And Allah is Almighty, All-Wise.
— Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:38
The crime of "robbery and civil disturbance against Islam" inside a Muslim state is referred to in Quran 5:33:
Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and spread mischief in the land is death, crucifixion, cutting off their hands and feet on opposite sides, or exile from the land. This ˹penalty˺ is a disgrace for them in this world, and they will suffer a tremendous punishment in the Hereafter.
— Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:33
The crime of illicit consensual sex is referred to in several verses, including Quran 24:2:
As for female and male fornicators, give each of them one hundred lashes, and do not let pity for them make you lenient in ˹enforcing˺ the law of Allah, if you ˹truly˺ believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a number of believers witness their punishment.
— Surah An-Nur 24:2
The crime of "accusation of illicit sex against chaste women without four witnesses" and a hudud punishment is based on Quran 24:4, 24:6, among others Quranic verse.
Those who accuse chaste women ˹of adultery˺ and fail to produce four witnesses, give them eighty lashes ˹each˺. And do not ever accept any testimony from them—for they are indeed the rebellious—
— Surah An-Nur 24:4
Hadiths
The crime of drinking alcohol is referred to in Quranic verse 5:90, and hudud punishment is described in hadiths:
O believers! Intoxicants, gambling, idols, and drawing lots for decisions are all evil of Satan's handiwork. So shun them so you may be successful.
— Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:90
The sahih hadiths, a compilation of sayings, practices and traditions of Muhammad as observed by his companions, are considered by Sunni Muslims to be the most trusted source of Islamic law after the Quran. They extensively describe hudud crimes and punishments. In some cases Islamic scholars have used hadiths to establish hudud punishments, which are not mentioned in the Quran. Thus, stoning as punishment for zina is based on hadiths that narrate episodes where Muhammad and his successors prescribed it. The tendency to use existence of a shubha (lit. doubt, uncertainty) to avoid hudud punishments is based on a hadith that states "avert hadd punishment in case of shubha".
Hudud offences and punishments
The offences subject to hudud punishment:
- Murder; The main verse for implementation in Islam is Al Baqara-178: "Believers! Retaliation is ordained for you regarding the people who were killed. Free versus free, captive versus captive, woman versus woman. Whoever is forgiven by the brother of the slain for a price, let him abide by the custom and pay the price well." Diyya or blood money will be paid for those who do not meet the conditions for retaliation for killings.
- Theft (sariqa, السرقة). Punished with amputation of a hand.
- Illicit sexual intercourse (zina, الزنا). Includes pre-marital sex and extra-marital sex. Classification of homosexual intercourse as zina differs according to legal school. Although stoning for zina is not mentioned in the Quran, all schools of traditional jurisprudence agreed on the basis of hadith that it is to be punished by stoning if the offender is muhsan (adult, free, Muslim, and married or previously married). Lashing is the penalty for offenders who are not muhsan, i.e. they do not meet all of the above criteria. The offenders must have acted of their own free will.
- False accusation of zina (qadhf, القذف). Punished by 80 lashes. (See:The Necklace Incident)
- Drinking alcohol (shurb al-khamr). Punished by 40 to 80 lashes, depending on the legal school.
Other situations that are considered Hudud crimes by some understandings
- Rebellion (baghi). / hirabah, qat' al-tariq or fasad; How the verse Al-Ma'idah 33, which describes the crime of hirabah, should be understood is a matter of debate even today. The verse talks about the punishment of criminals by killing, hanging, having their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, and being exiled from the earth, in response to an abstract crime such as "fighting against Allah and his messenger".
Punished with death followed by crucifixion, amputation of the right hand and the left foot (the combined right-left double amputation procedure is known as the ancient punishment of "cross-amputation") or banishment. Different punishments are prescribed for different scenarios and there are differences of opinion regarding specifics within and between legal schools. Expanding or narrowing the conditions and scope of this crime according to new situations and universal standards are issues that continue to be discussed today.
- Apostasy (riddah, ردة or irtidad, ارتداد), leaving Islam for another religion or for atheism, is regarded as one of hudud crimes liable to capital punishment in traditional Maliki, Hanbali and Shia jurisprudence, but not in Hanafi and Shafi'i fiqh as the hudud are a kaffarah for the hudud offences, though these schools all regard apostasy as a grave crime and prescribe the death penalty for apostates.
There are a number of differences in views between the different madhhabs with regard to the punishments appropriate in specific situations and the required process before they are carried out. There are also legal differences (ikhtilaf) over the term limitation of pronouncing the punishment. Hanafite scholars assert that punishment for hadd crimes other than qadhf (false accusation of illegal sex) have to be implemented within a month; except for witnesses with a valid legal justifications for delayed testimony or in cases of self-confession.
Marja' following Shia jurisprudence generally believe that hudud punishments can be changed by appropriately qualified jurists.
Murder, injury and property damage are not hudud crimes in Islamic criminal jurisprudence, and are subsumed under other categories of Islamic penal law in Iran which are:
- Qisas (meaning retaliation, and following the principle of "eye for an eye"), and diyah ("blood money", financial compensation paid to the victim or heirs of a victim in the cases of murder, bodily harm or property damage. Diyyah is an alternative to Qisas for the same class of crimes).
- Ta'zeer – punishment administered at the discretion of the judge.
History
Because the stringent traditional restrictions on application of hudud punishments, they were rarely applied historically. Criminals who escaped hudud punishments could still be sanctioned under the system of tazir, which gave judges and high officials discretionary sentencing powers to punish crimes that did not fall under the categories of hudud and qisas. In practice, since early on in Islamic history, criminal cases were usually handled by ruler-administered courts or local police using procedures that were only loosely related to Sharia. During the 19th century, Sharia-based criminal laws were replaced by statutes inspired by European models nearly everywhere in the Islamic world, except some particularly conservative regions such as the Arabian peninsula.
Under pressure from Islamist movements, recent decades have witnessed re-introduction of hudud punishments and by 2013 about a dozen of the 50 or so Muslim-majority countries had made hudud applicable, many countries have disregarded traditional strict requirements. In 1979 Pakistan instituted the Hudood Ordinances. In July 1980 Iran stoned to death four offenders in Kerman. By the late 1980s, Mauritania and Sudan had "enacted laws to grant courts the power to hand down hadd penalties". During the 1990s Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan, and northern Nigeria followed suit. In 1994 the Iraqi president Saddam Hussein (who had persecuted and executed many Islamists), issued a decree "ordering that robbers and car thieves should lose their hands". Brunei adopted hudud laws in 2014.
Enforcement of hudud punishments has varied from country to country. In Pakistan and Libya, hudud punishments have not been applied at all because of strict requirements. In Nigeria local courts have passed several stoning sentences for zina, all of which were overturned on appeal and left unenforced because of lack of enough evidence.
During the first two years when Sharia was made state law in Sudan (1983 and 1985), a hudud punishment for theft was inflicted on some criminals, and then discontinued though not repealed. Floggings for moral crimes have been carried out since the codification of Islamic law in Sudan in 1991 and continue. In 2012 a Sudanese court sentenced Intisar Sharif Abdallah, a teenager, to death by stoning in the city of Omdurman under article 146 of Sudan's Criminal Act after charging her with "adultery with a married person". She was held in Omdurman prison with her legs shackled, along with her 5-month-old baby. (She was released on July 3, 2012 after an international outcry.)
The hudud punishment for zinā in cases of consensual sex and the punishment of rape victims who failed to prove the coercion, which has occurred in some countries, have been the subject of a global human rights debate. In Pakistan many rape victims who have failed to prove accusations have been jailed this has been criticized as leading to "hundreds of incidents where a woman subjected to rape, or gang rape, were eventually accused of zināʾ" and incarcerated. Kennedy states that majority of cases against women jailed on charges of zina in Pakistan are filed by their family members against disobedient daughters and estranged wives as harassment suits. Hundreds of women in Afghanistan jails are victims of rape or domestic violence, accused of zina under tazir. In Pakistan, over 200,000 zina cases against women under the Hudood laws were under way at various levels in Pakistan's legal system in 2005. In addition to thousands of women in prison awaiting trial for zina-related charges, rape victims in Pakistan have been reluctant to report rape because they feared being charged with zina. The resulting controversy prompted the law to be amended in 2006, though the amended version has been criticized for continuing to blur the legal distinction between rape and consensual sex.
Crucifixion in Islam, at least in Saudi Arabia, takes the form of displaying beheaded remains of a perpetrator "for a few hours on top of a pole". They are far fewer in number than executions. One case was that of Muhammad Basheer al-Ranally who was executed and crucified on December 7, 2009 for "spreading disorder in the land" by kidnapping, raping and murdering several young boys. ISIS has also reportedly crucified prisoners.
Requirements for conviction
Illegal sex
Main article: ZinaThere are certain standards for proof that must be met in Islamic law for zina punishment to apply. In the Shafii, Hanbali, and Hanafi law schools Rajm (public stoning) or lashing is imposed for religiously prohibited sex only if the crime is proven, either by four male adults witnessing at first hand the actual sexual intercourse at the same time or by self-confession. For the establishment of adultery, four male Muslim witnesses must have seen the act in its most intimate details. Shia Islam allows substitution of one male Muslim with two female Muslims, but requires that at least one of the witnesses be a male. The Sunni Maliki school of law consider pregnancy in an unmarried woman as sufficient evidence of zina, unless there is evidence of rape or compulsion. The punishment can be averted by a number of legal "doubts" (shubuhat), however, such as existence of an invalid marriage contract or possibility that the conception predates a divorce. The majority Maliki opinion theoretically allowed for a pregnancy lasting up to seven years, indicating a concern of the jurists to shield women from the charge of zina and to protect children from the stigma of illegitimacy. These requirements made zina virtually impossible to prove in practice.
If a person alleges zina and fails to provide four consistent Muslim witnesses, or if witnesses provide inconsistent testimonies, they can be sentenced to eighty lashes for unfounded accusation of fornication (qadhf), itself a hadd crime." Rape was traditionally prosecuted under legal categories requiring less stringent evidentiary rules. In Pakistan, the Hudood Ordinances of 1979 subsumed prosecution of rape under the category of zina, making rape extremely difficult to prove and exposing the victims to jail sentences for admitting illicit intercourse. The resulting controversy prompted the law to be amended in 2006, though the amended version is still criticized by some for blurring the legal distinction between rape and consensual sex.
Theft
Malik ibn Anas, the originator of the Maliki judicial school of thought, recorded in The Muwatta of many detailed circumstances under which the punishment of hand cutting should and should not be carried out. Commenting on the verse in the Quran on theft, Yusuf Ali says that most Islamic jurists believe that "petty thefts are exempt from this punishment" and that "only one hand should be cut off for the first theft." Islamic jurists disagree as to when amputation is mandatory religious punishment. This is a fatwa given by Taqī al-Dīn ʿAlī b. ʿAbd al-Kāfī al-Subkī (d. 756/1356), a senior Shafi scholar and judge from one of the leading scholarly families of Damascus: The Imam and Shaykh said: It has been agreed upon that the Hadd is obligatory for one who has committed theft and :
# was taken from a place generally considered secure (ḥirz)
- it had not been procured as spoils of war (mughannam)
- nor from the public treasury
- and it was taken by his own hand
- not by some tool or mechanism (āla)
- on his own
- solely
- while he was of sound mind
- and of age
- and a Muslim
- and free
- not in the Haram
- in Mecca
- and not in the Abode of War
- and he is not one who is granted access to it from time to time
- and he stole from someone other than his wife
- and not from a uterine relative
- and not from her husband if it is a woman
- when he was not drunk
- and not compelled by hunger
- or under duress
- and he stole some property that was owned
- and would be permissible to sell to Muslims
- and he stole it from someone who had not wrongfully appropriated it
- and the value of what he stole reached three dirhams
- of pure silver
- by the Meccan weight
- and it was not meat
- or any slaughtered animal
- nor anything edible
- or potable
- or some fowl
- or game
- or a dog
- or a cat
- or animal dung
- or feces (ʿadhira)
- or dirt
- or red ochre (maghara)
- or arsenic (zirnīkh)
- or pebbles
- or stones
- or glass
- or coals
- or firewood
- or reeds (qaṣab)
- or wood
- or fruit
- or a donkey
- or a grazing animal
- or a copy of the Quran
- or a plant pulled up from its roots (min badā'ihi)
- or produce from a walled garden
- or a tree
- or a free person
- or a slave
- if they are able to speak and are of sound mind
- and he had committed no offense against him
- before he removed him from a place where he had not been permitted to enter
- from his secure location
- by his own hand
- and witness is born
- to all of the above
- by two witnesses
- who are men
- according to that we already presented in the chapter on testimony
- and they did not disagree
- or retract their testimony
- and the thief did not claim that he was the rightful owner of what he stole
- and his left hand is healthy
- and his foot is healthy
- and neither body part is missing anything
- and the person he stole from does not give him what he had stolen as a gift
- and he did not become the owner of what he stole after he stole it
- and the thief did not return the stolen item to the person he stole it from
- and the thief did not claim it
- and the thief was not owed a debt by the person he stole from equal to the value of what he stole
- and the person stolen from is present
- and he made a claim for the stolen property
- and requested that amputation occur
- before the thief could repent
- and the witnesses to the theft are present
- and a month had not passed since the theft occurred
All of this was said by ʿAlī b. Aḥmad b. Saʿīd (probably Ibn Ḥazm, d. 1064). And the Imam and Shaykh added: and it is also on the condition that confession not precede the testimony and then after it he retracts . For if the thief does that first and then direct evidence (bayyina) is provided of his crime and then he retracts his confession, the punishment of amputation is dropped according to the more correct opinion in the Shafi school, because the establishment came by confession not by the direct evidence. So his retraction is accepted.
Efficacy
Amputation
Those arguing in favor of that the hudud punishment of amputation for theft often describe the visceral horror/fear of losing a hand as providing strong deterrence against theft, while at the same time the numerous requirements for its application make it seldom used and thus more humane than other punishments. Supporters include Abdel-Halim Mahmoud, the rector of Azhar from 1973 to 1978, who stated it was not only ordained by God but when implemented by Ibn Saud in Saudi Arabia brought law and order to his land — though amputation was carried out only seven times. In his popular book Islam the Misunderstood Religion, Muhammad Qutb asserts that amputation punishment for theft "has been executed only six times throughout a period of four hundred years".
However, according to historian Jonathan A.C. Brown, at least in the mid-1100s in the Iraqi city of Mosul the Muslim jurists found the punishment less than effective. Faced with a crime wave of theft the ulama "begged their new sultan ... to implement harsh punishments" outside of sharia. The hands of arrested thieves were not being cut off because evidentiary standards were so strict, nor were they deterred by the ten lashes (discretionary punishment or tazir) that Shariah courts were limited to by hadith.
Disputes and debates over reform
A number of scholars/reformers have suggested that traditional hudud penalties "may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad lived" but are no longer, or that "new expression" for "the underlying religious principles and values" of Hudud should be developed. Tariq Ramadan has called for an international moratorium on the punishments of hudud laws until greater scholarly consensus can be reached.
Many contemporary Muslim scholars think that the hudud punishments are not absolute obligations as it is an act of mu'amalah (non-worship), thus, they think that hudud is the maximum punishment.
Hudud punishments have been called incompatible with international norms of human rights and sometimes simple justice. At least one observer (Sadakat Kadri) has complained that the inspiration of faith has not been a guarantee of justice, citing as an example the execution of two dissidents for "waging war against God" (Moharebeh) in the Islamic Republic of Iran—the dissidents waging war by organizing unarmed political protests. The Hudood Ordinance in Pakistan led to the jailing of thousands of women on zina-related charges, were used to file "nuisance or harassment suits against disobedient daughters or estranged wives". The sentencing to death of women in Pakistan, Nigeria, Sudan for zina caused international uproar, being perceived as not only as too harsh, but an "odious" punishment of victims not wrongdoers.
Among the questions critics have raised about the modern application of hudud, include: why, if the seventh-century practice is divine law eternally valid and not to be reformed, have its proponents instituted modern innovations? These include use of general anesthetic for amputation (in Libya, along with instruction to hold off if amputation might "prove dangerous to health"), selective introduction (leaving out crucifixion in Libya and Pakistan), using gunfire to expedite death during stoning (in Pakistan). Another question is why they have been so infrequently applied both historically and recently. There is only one record of a stoning in the entire history of Ottoman Empire, and none at all in Syria during Muslim rule. Modern states that "have so publicly enshrined them over the past few decades have gone to great lengths to avoid their imposition." There was only one amputation apiece in Northern Nigeria and Libya, no stonings in Nigeria. In Pakistan the "country's medical profession collectively refused to supervise amputations throughout the 1980s", and "more than three decades of official Islamization have so far failed to produce a single actual stoning or amputation." (Saudi Arabia is the exception with four stonings and 45 amputations during the 1980s though they were overturned because of lack of required evidence.)
Among two of the leading Islamist movements, the Muslim Brotherhood has taken "a distinctly ambivalent approach" toward hudud penalties with "practical plans to put them into effect ... given a very low priority;" and in Pakistan, Munawar Hasan, then Ameer (leader) of the Jamaat-e-Islami, has stated that "unless and until we get a just society, the question of punishment is just a footnote."
Supporting hudud punishments are Islamic revivalists such as Abul A'la Maududi who writes that in a number of places the Quran "declares that sodomy is such a heinous sin ... that it is the duty of the Islamic State to eradicate this crime and ... punish those who are guilty of it." According to Richard Terrill, hudud punishments are considered claims of God, revealed through Muhammad, and as such immutable, unable to be altered or abolished by people, jurists or parliament.
Opposition to hudud (or at least minimizing of hudud) within the framework of Islam comes in more than one form. Some (such as elements of the MB and JI mentioned above) support making its application wait for the creation of a "just society" where people are not "driven to steal in order to survive." Another follows the Modernist approach calling for hudud and other parts of Sharia to be re-interpreted from the classical form and follow broad guidelines rather than exact all-encompassing prescriptions. Others consider hudud punishments "essentially deterrent in nature" to be applied very, very infrequently.
Others (particularly Quranists) propose excluding ahadith and using only verses in the Quran in formulating Islamic Law, which would exclude stoning (though not amputation, flogging or execution for some crimes). The vast majority of Muslims and most Islamic scholars, however, consider both Quran and sahih hadiths to be a valid source of Sharia, with Quranic verse 33.21, among others, as justification for this belief.
Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example for whoever has hope in Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah often. ...It is not for a believing man or woman—when Allah and His Messenger decree a matter—to have any other choice in that matter. Indeed, whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has clearly gone ˹far˺ astray.
— Surah Al-Ahzab 33:21-36
See also
- Islamic criminal jurisprudence
- Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam
- Zia-ul-Haq's Islamization
- Hudood Ordinance
Notes
- The courts of Pakistan have avoided enforcement of the hadd penalties entirely, extrajudicial lynchings and guerilla activity notwithstanding. Colonel Qaddafi's Libya conducted just one official amputation, in a 2003 case involving a four-man robbery gang. Northern Nigeria has claimed about the same number of hand in total, ... has not carried out any stonings at all. ...
- Arabic: حدود Ḥudūd, also transliterated hudood; plural of hadd, حد
- shubuhat, sing. shubha
References
- Wehr, Hans. Hans Wehr Dictionary of Arabic (PDF). p. 135. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2018-06-20. Retrieved 20 June 2018.
- The Quran mentions the “limits of God” several times, warning Muslims of the sin of transgressing them and that they should not even approach them (Quran 2:187). But nowhere does the phrase appear in the clear context of labeling certain crimes (see Quran, 2:229, 4:14, 58:4, 65:1, though 4:14 is followed by discussion of sexual impropriety.https://yaqeeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Stoning-and-Hand-Cutting-Understanding-the-Hudud-and-the-Shariah-in-Islam-1.pdf
- ^ Wael Hallaq (2009), An introduction to Islamic law, p.173. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521678735.
- ^ Rudolph Peters (2009). "Hudud". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2017-03-03. Retrieved 2017-07-06.
- ^ Z. Mir-Hosseini (2011), "Criminalizing sexuality: zina laws as violence against women in Muslim contexts," SUR-International Journal on Human Rights, 8(15), pp. 7–33
- Asifa Quraishi (2000). Windows of Faith: Muslim Women Scholar-activists in North America. Syracuse University Press. p. 126. ISBN 978-0-815-628514.
- ^ Silvia Tellenbach (2015), "Islamic Criminal Law", In The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law (Ed: Markus D. Dubber and Tatjana Hornle), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199673599, pp. 251-253
- Campo, Juan Eduardo (2009). Encyclopedia of Islam, p.174. Infobase Publishing. ISBN 978-0816054541.
- The Prophet (peace be upon him) ordered the killers punished in exactly the same way Yet prominent scholars were skeptical of reports that he had actually ordered the murderers' hands or feet to cut off. https://yaqeeninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Stoning-and-Hand-Cutting-Understanding-the-Hudud-and-the-Shariah-in-Islam-1.pdf
- Otto, Jan Michiel (2008). Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries. Amsterdam University Press. pp. 663, 31. ISBN 978-90-8728-048-2.
- Philip Reichel and Jay Albanese (2013), Handbook of Transnational Crime and Justice, SAGE publications, ISBN 978-1452240350, pp. 36–37
- Eki̇Nci̇, Ahmet (2021). "İslam Hukukunda Namaz Kılmayanın Hükmü". Kocatepe İslami İlimler Dergisi. 4 (2): 388–409. doi:10.52637/kiid.982657.
- ^ Brown, Jonathan A.C. (2014). "5. Muslim Martin Luthers and the Paradox of Tradition". Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. pp. 180–181. ISBN 978-1780744209.
- Terrill, Richard J. (2009) . World Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey. Routledge. p. 629. ISBN 9781437755770. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Hadd Archived 2015-02-05 at the Wayback Machine Oxford Dictionary of Islam, Oxford University Press (2012)
- ^ Hallaq, Wael (2009). Shariah: Theory, Practice and Transformations. Cambridge University Press. p. 311. ISBN 978-0-521-86147-2.
- ^ Vikør, Knut S. (2014). "Sharīʿah". In Emad El-Din Shahin (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Politics. Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2017-02-02. Retrieved 2017-07-04.
- ^ Otto, Jan Michiel (2008). Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries: Tensions and Opportunities for Dutch and EU Foreign Policy (PDF). Amsterdam University Press. pp. 18–20. ISBN 978-90-8728-048-2. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-10-09. Retrieved 2017-07-04.
- Mayer, Ann Elizabeth (2009). "Law. Modern Legal Reform". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2017-07-31. Retrieved 2017-07-04.
- "Afghan supreme leader orders full implementation of sharia law". The Guardian. Agence France-Presse. 2022-11-14. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2024-02-27.
- "Death by stoning for gays, amputation for theft in Brunei". Bangkok Post. 27 March 2019. Retrieved 2021-11-03.
- "Shariah Punishments in the Islamic Republics of Mauritania and Maldives, and Islamic State of Yemen". academic.oup.com. Retrieved 2024-03-28.
- "United Arab Emirates | Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children". 3 November 2017. Retrieved 2024-01-07.
- "Yemeni man sentenced to hand and foot amputation for armed robbery". Amnesty International. 2013-09-16. Retrieved 2021-11-03.
- see also Quran 24:6, 9:66, 16:106
- Elyse Semerdjian (2008), "Off the Straight Path": Illicit Sex, Law, and Community in Ottoman Aleppo, Syracuse University Press, ISBN 978-0815631736, pp. 8–14
- Christopher Melchert (1997), The Formation of the Sunni Schools of Law: 9th–10th Centuries CE, Brill Academic, ISBN 978-9004109520, pp. 16 with footnote 78
- ^ Semerdjian, Elyse (2009). "Zinah". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195305135. Retrieved 2017-07-04.
- Silvia Tellenbach (2015), "Islamic Criminal Law", In The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law (Ed: Markus D. Dubber and Tatjana Hornle), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199673599, pp. 255
- ^ M. Cherif Bassiouni (1997), Crimes and the Criminal Process Archived 2018-09-27 at the Wayback Machine, Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 3 (1997), pp. 269–286
- Julie Chadbourne (1999), Never wear your shoes after midnight: Legal trends under the Pakistan Zina Ordinance, Wisconsin International Law Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 179–234
- Reza Aslan (2004), "The Problem of Stoning in the Islamic Penal Code: An Argument for Reform", UCLA Journal of Islamic and Near East Law, Vol 3, No. 1, pp. 91–119
- ^ Peters, R. (2012). "Zinā or Zināʾ". In P. Bearman; Th. Bianquis; C.E. Bosworth; E. van Donzel; W.P. Heinrichs (eds.). Encyclopaedia of Islam (2nd ed.). Brill. doi:10.1163/1573-3912_islam_SIM_8168.
- Joseph Schacht, An Introduction to Islamic Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973), pp. 178–181
- Shah, Niaz A. (2011). Islamic Law and the Law of Armed Conflict: The Conflict in Pakistan. Taylor & Francis. p. 62. ISBN 9781136824685. Retrieved 13 November 2015.
- https://ejournal.um.edu.my/index.php/JS/article/download/27993/12654/63844
- ^ Khasan, Moh (24 May 2021). "From Textuality to Universality: The Evolution of Ḥirābah Crimes in Islamic Jurisprudence". Al-Jami'ah: Journal of Islamic Studies. 59 (1): 1–32. doi:10.14421/ajis.2021.591.1-32. ISSN 2338-557X. Retrieved 16 November 2024.
- Peters & De Vries (1976), "Apostasy in Islam," Die Welt des Islams, Vol. 17, Issue 1/4, pp. 1–25
- J Rehman (2010), "Freedom of expression, apostasy, and blasphemy within Islam: Sharia, criminal justice systems, and modern Islamic state practices", Criminal Justice Matters, 79(1), pp. 4–5, doi:10.1080/09627250903569841
- Peters, Rudolph (2005). "2: The Classical Doctrine". Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-first Century. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-521-79226-4.
- "New Fatwas". Archived from the original on 2017-11-13. Retrieved September 7, 2017.
In field of governmental chapters of Islamic Jurisprudence, the prophet and the infallible Imams and the perfect and just jurists are allowed to alter those provisions, based on the general rules of Islamic jurisprudence and according to the general interests of Islamic Umma.
- Kadivar, Mohsen. "Ayatollah Khomeini's Political Theory and Public Interest" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-09-08. Retrieved September 7, 2017.
The absolute guardianship of jurist (al-wilayat al-mutlaqah lil-faqih) is the same as the guardianship that God gave the Prophet and Imams. It is one of the most prominent shari'a ordinances (al-ahkam al-ilahiyya), that has priority over ALL shari'a ordinances.
- Black, E. Ann; Esmaeili, Hossein; Hosen, Nadirsyah (2013). Modern Perspectives on Islamic Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. p. 219. ISBN 9780857934475. Retrieved 5 November 2015.
- The Constitution of Iran: Politics and the State in the Islamic Republic / by Asghar Schirazi, London; New York: I.B. Tauris, 1997 pp. 223–24
- Calder, Norman (2009). "Law. Legal Thought and Jurisprudence". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2017-07-31. Retrieved 2017-07-04.
- Ziadeh, Farhat J. (2009c). "Criminal Law". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2017-05-05. Retrieved 2017-07-06.
- Use of sharia by country (map)
- Kadri 2012, p. 220.
- Is Brunei's Harsh New Form of Shari'a a Godly Move or a Cunning Political Ploy? Time (May 27, 2014)
- Lau, Martin (1 September 2007). "Twenty-Five Years of Hudood Ordinances - A Review". Washington and Lee Law Review. 64 (4): 1291–1314. Archived from the original on 2015-02-03. Retrieved 2015-02-03.
- Gunnar J. Weimann (2010). Islamic Criminal Law in Northern Nigeria: Politics, Religion, Judicial Practice. Amsterdam University Press. p. 77. ISBN 9789056296551.
- Sudan: Ban Death by Stoning Archived 2017-01-15 at the Wayback Machine Human Rights Watch (May 31, 2012)
- "Amnesty: SUDANESE MOTHER WALKS FREE". Sudan Tribune. 5 July 2012. Archived from the original on 2015-11-17. Retrieved 5 November 2015.
- KUGLE (2003), "Sexuality, diversity and ethics in the agenda of progressive Muslims," In: SAFI, O. (Ed.). Progressive Muslims: On Justice, Gender, and Pluralism, Oxford: Oneworld. pp. 190–234
- LAU, M. (2007), "Twenty-Five Years of Hudood Ordinances: A Review," Washington and Lee Law Review, n. 64, pp. 1291-1314
- Kecia Ali (2006), Sexual Ethics and Islam, ISBN 978-1851684564, Chapter 4.
- "National Commission on the status of women's report on Hudood Ordinance 1979". Archived from the original on 2007-12-29. Retrieved 2015-02-03.
- Afghanistan - Moral Crimes Archived 2015-02-03 at the Wayback Machine Human Rights Watch (2012); Quote "Some women and girls have been convicted of zina, sex outside of marriage, after being raped or forced into prostitution. Zina is a crime under Afghan law, punishable by up to 15 years in prison."
- Pakistan Archived 2016-03-07 at the Wayback Machine Human Rights Watch (2005)
- Rahat Imran (2005), "Legal Injustices: The Zina Hudood Ordinance of Pakistan and Its Implications for Women," Journal of International Women's Studies, Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 78–100
- ^ Kadri 2012, p. 235.
- ^ "Paedophile rapist to be beheaded and crucified in Saudi Arabia". The Independent. 22 October 2011. Archived from the original on 2015-11-19. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Nebehay, Stephanie (2015-02-04). "ISIS Reportedly Crucified, Buried Children Alive In Iraq: UN". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2015-11-19. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Camilla Adang (2003), "Ibn Hazam on Homosexuality," Al Qantara, Vol. 25, No. 1, pp. 5–31
- A. Quraishi (1999), "Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina," Islamic studies, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403–431
- Ali, Abdullah Yusuf (2004). The Meaning Of The Holy Qur'an (11th ed.). Amana Publications. p. 259. ISBN 978-1-59008-025-2.
- Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi (2000). The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2. Islamic Publications. p. 451.
- Taqi al-Din al-Subki, Fatāwā al-Subkī, vol. 2, pp. 333–334. (Beirut: Dār al-Maʿrifah) (online)
- Jonathan Brown, The Shariah, Homosexuality & Safeguarding Each Other's Rights in a Pluralist Society Archived 2016-07-31 at the Wayback Machine
- ^ Brown, Jonathan A.C. (2014). Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet's Legacy. Oneworld Publications. pp. 150–151. ISBN 978-1780744209. Retrieved 4 June 2018.
- Qutb, Muhammad. Islam, the Misunderstood Religion (PDF) (6th ed.). p. 99. Retrieved 13 June 2018.
- David Ayalon, 'The Great Yasa of Chingiz Khan: a Reexamination (Part C2)` Studia Islamica 38 (1973), pp.124–125
- ^ William Montgomery Watt quoted in Gerhard Endress, Islam: An Introduction to Islam, Columbia University Press, 1988, p. 31
- ^ reformers cited by Esposito Esposito, John L. (2002). What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam. Oxford University Press. p. 151. ISBN 978-0-19-515713-0.
- An international call for a moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and the death penalty in the Islamic World Archived 2015-10-29 at the Wayback Machine tariqramadan.com. 2005 April 5
- "Teori Hudud Muhammad Shahrur". 14 June 2019.
- Kadri 2012, p. 234.
- Esfandiari, Golnaz (January 28, 2010). "Iran Hangs Two Sentenced In Postelection Trials". rferl. Archived from the original on 2015-11-20. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Kennedy, Islamization of Laws and Economy, 1996: p.64
- Puniyani, Ram (2005). Religion, Power and Violence: Expression of Politics in Contemporary Times. SAGE. p. 197. ISBN 9780761933380. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Women's rights in Pakistan Archived 2007-03-14 at the Wayback Machine The Washington Times
- ^ Kadri 2012, p. 217.
- ^ Kadri 2012, p. 232.
- Kadri 2012, p. 225.
- Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi (2000). The Meaning of the Qur'an, Volume 2. Islamic Publications. pp. 48–52.
- Richard Terrill (2012), World Criminal Justice Systems: A Comparative Survey, Routledge, ISBN 978-1455725892, pp. 557–558
- Esposito, John L. (2000). "Contemporary Islam: Reformation or Revolution?". Arab Culture and Civilization. Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 2015-11-20. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- ^ Afsaruddin, Asma (2010). "3". In Christoffersen, Lisbet; Nielsen, Jørgen S (eds.). Shari'a As Discourse: Legal Traditions and the Encounter with Europe. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.. ISBN 9781409497028. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- ^ Shahrur, Muhammad. The Quran Morality and Critical Reasoning (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2016-03-06. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
- Edip Yuksel, Layth Saleh al-Shaiban, Martha Schulte-Nafeh, Quran: A Reformist Translation, Brainbow Press, 2007
- ^ Aisha Y. Musa, The Qur'anists Archived 2017-11-12 at the Wayback Machine, Florida International University, accessed May 22, 2013.
- ^ Neal Robinson (2013), Islam: A Concise Introduction, Routledge, ISBN 978-0878402243, Chapter 7, pp. 85–89
- Mazrui, Ali A. "Liberal Islam versus Moderate Islam: Elusive Moderation and the Siege Mentality". Archived from the original on 2006-05-06. Retrieved 2006-07-03.
- Quran 3:32, 3:132, 4:59, 8:20, 33:66
- Muhammad Qasim Zaman (2012), Modern Islamic Thought in a Radical Age, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-1107096455, pp. 30–31
Sources
- Kadri, Sadakat (2012). Heaven on Earth: A Journey Through Shari'a Law from the Deserts of Ancient Arabia to the Streets of the Modern Muslim World. Macmillan. ISBN 9780099523277.
- Kennedy, Charles (1996). Islamization of Laws and Economy, Case Studies on Pakistan. Institute of Policy Studies, The Islamic Foundation.
Further reading
Short overviews
- Rudolph Peters (2009). "Hudud". In John L. Esposito (ed.). The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on December 23, 2009.
- Silvia Tellenbach (2014). "Islamic Criminal Law". In Markus D. Dubber; Tatjana Hörnle (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law.
- M. Cherif Bassiouni (1997), "Crimes and the Criminal Process," Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 12, No. 3 (1997), pp. 269–286 JSTOR 3381843
General references
- Vikør, Knut S. (2005). Between God and the Sultan: A History of Islamic Law. Oxford University Press.
- Peters, Rudolph (2006). Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth to the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press.
- Wael B. Hallaq (2009). Sharī'a: Theory, Practice, Transformations. Cambridge University Press.
- Olaf Köndgen (2022). A Bibliography of Islamic Criminal Law. Brill.
Specific topics
- Zina, Rape and Islamic Law: An Islamic Legal Analysis of the Rape Laws in Pakistan. Archived 2019-08-19 at the Wayback Machine A Position Paper by KARAMAH: Muslim Women Lawyers for Human Rights
- A. Quraishi (1999), "Her honour: an Islamic critique of the rape provisions in Pakistan's ordinance on zina," Islamic studies, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 403–431 JSTOR 20837050
- "Punishment in Islamic Law: A Critique of the Hudud Bill of Kelantan, Malaysia," Mohammad Hashim Kamali, Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1998), pp. 203–234 JSTOR 3382008
- "Islamization and Legal Reform in Malaysia: The Hudud Controversy of 1992," Maria Luisa Seda-Poulin, Southeast Asian Affairs (1993), pp. 224–242 JSTOR 27912077
- "Criminal Justice under Shari'ah in the 21st Century—An Inter-Cultural View," Michael Bohlander and Mohammad M. Hedayati-Kakhki, Arab Law Quarterly, Vol. 23, No. 4 (2009), pp. 417–436 JSTOR /40604767
- "Islamization in Sudan: A Critical Assessment," Carolyn Fluehr-Lobban, Middle East Journal, Vol. 44, No. 4 (Autumn, 1990), pp. 610–623 JSTOR 4328193