by
Denis J. Wiechman, Jerry D. Kendall, and Mohammad K. Azarian
Reproduced
with permission from the Office of International Criminal Justice at the
University of Illinois
The
general public and many academics have several preconceived notions about
Islamic Law. One such notion is that Islamic judges are bound by ancient
and outdated rules of fixed punishments for all crimes. This paper explores
that idea and looks at other myths in an attempt to present Islamic Law
from a non-biased view of Shar'iah Law.
Some contemporary scholars
fail to recognize Islamic Law as an equal to English Common Law, European
Civil Law and Socialist Law. A few academics have even attempted to place
Islamic Law into the Civil Law tradition. Other writers have simply added
a footnote to their works on comparative justice on the religious law categories
of Islamic Law, Hindu Law, which is still used in some parts of India,
and the Law of Moses from the Old Testament which still guides the current
thought of the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) today. This survey will attempt
to alter some of these inaccurate perceptions and treatments in both the
contemporary literature and academic writings.
Mohammed Salam Madkoar explains
the theoretical assumptions of Islamic Law:
In
order to protect the five important indispensables in Islam (religion,
life, intellect, offspring and property), Islamic Law has provided a worldly
punishment in addition to that in the hereafter. Islam has, in fact, adopted
two courses for the preservation of these five indispensables: the first
is through cultivating religious consciousness in the human soul and the
awakening of human awareness through moral education; the second is by
inflicting deterrent punishment, which is the basis of the Islamic criminal
system. Therefore "Hudud," Retaliation (Kisas) and Discretionary
(Tazir) punishments have been prescribed according to the type of
the crime committed.
Islamic Law and Jurisprudence
is not always understood by the western press. Although it is the responsibility
of the mass media to bring to the world's attention violations of human
rights and acts of terror, many believe that media stereotyping of all
Muslims is a major problem. The recent bombing at the World Trade Centre
in New York City is a prime example. The media often used the term "Islamic
Fundamentalists" when referring to the accused in the case. It also referred
to the Egyptian connections in that case as "Islamic Fundamentalists."
The media has used the label of "Islamic Fundamentalist" to imply all kinds
of possible negative connotations: terrorists, kidnappers and hostage takers.
Since the media does not use the term "Fundamentalist Christian" each time
a Christian does something wrong, the use of such labels is wrong for any
group, Christians, Muslims, or Orthodox Jews.
A Muslim who is trying to
live his religion is indeed a true believer in God. This person tries to
live all of the tenets of his religion in a fundamental way. Thus,
a true Muslim is a fundamentalist in the practice of that religion, but
a true Muslim is not radical, because the Qur’an teaches tolerance and
moderation in all things. When the popular media generalizes
from the fundamentalist believer to the "radical fundamentalist" label
they do a disservice to all Muslims and others.
No Separation
of Church and State
To understand Islamic Law one
must first understand the assumptions of Islam and the basic tenets of
the religion. The meaning of the word 'Islam' is "submission or surrender
to Allah's (God's) will." Therefore, Muslims must first and foremost obey
and submit to Allah's will. Mohammad the Prophet was called by God to translate
verses from the Angel Gabriel to form the most important book in Islam,
the Qur’an, Muslims believe.
There are over 1.2 billion
Muslims today world-wide, over 20% of the world's population. "By the year
2000, one out of every four persons on the planet will be a Muslim," Rittat
Hassan estimated in 1990. There are 35 nations with population over 50%
Muslim, and there are another 21 nations that have significant Muslim populations.
There are 19 nations which have declared Islam in their respective constitutions.
The Muslim religion is a global one and is rapidly expanding. The sheer
number of Muslims living today makes the idea of putting Islamic Law into
a footnote in contemporary writings inappropriate.
The most difficult part of
Islamic Law for most westerners to grasp is that there is no separation
of church and state. The religion of Islam and the government are one.
Islamic Law is controlled, ruled and regulated by the Islamic religion.
The theocracy controls all public and private matters. Government, law
and religion are one. There are varying degrees of this concept in many
nations, but all law, government and civil authority rests upon it and
it is a part of Islamic religion. There are civil laws in Muslim nations
for Muslim and non-Muslim people. Shar'iah
is only applicable to Muslims. Most Americans and others schooled in Common
Law have great difficulty with that concept.The U.S. Constitution
(Bill of Rights) prohibits the government from "establishing a religion."
The U.S. Supreme Court has concluded in numerous cases that the U.S. Government
can't favour one religion over another. That concept is implicit for most
U.S. legal scholars and many U.S. academicians believe that any mixture
of "church and state" is inherently evil and filled with many problems.
They reject all notions of a mixture of religion and government.
To start with such preconceived
notions limits the knowledge base and information available to try and
solve many social and criminal problems. To use an analogy from Christianity
may be helpful. To ignore what all Christian religions except your own
say about God would limit your knowledge base and you would not be informed
or have the ability to appreciate your own religion. The same is true for
Islamic Law and Islamic religion. You must open your mind to further expand
your knowledge base. Islamic Law has many ideas,
concepts, and information that can solve contemporary crime problems in
many areas of the world. To do this you must first put on hold
the preconceived notion of "separation of church and state."
Judge
(Qazi)
Another myth concerning Islamic
Law is that there are no judges. Historically the Islamic Judge (Qazi)
was a legal secretary appointed by the provincial governors. Each Islamic
nation may differ slightly in how the judges are selected. Some nations
will use a formal process of legal education and internship in a lower
court. For example, in Saudi Arabia there are two levels of courts. The
formal Shariah Courts which were established in 1928 hear traditional cases.
The Saudi government established a ministry of justice in 1970, and they
added administrative tribunals for traffic laws, business and commerce.
"All
judges are accountable to God in their decisions and practices" (Lippman,
p.66-68).
One
common myth associated with Islamic Law is that judges must always impose
a fixed and predetermined punishment for each crime. Western
writers often point to the inflexible nature of Islamic Law. Judges under
Islamic Law are bound to administer several punishments for a few very
serious crimes found in the Qur’an, but they possess much greater freedom
in punishment for less serious (non-Hadd) crimes. Common law is filled
with precedents, rules, and limitations which inhibit creative justice.
Judges under Islamic Law are free to create new options and ideas to solve
new problems associated with crime.
Elements
of Shar'iah Law
Islamic law is known as Shariah
Law, and Shariah means the path to follow God's Law. Shar'iah Law is holistic
or eclectic in its approach to guide the individual in most daily matters.
Shariah
Law controls, rules and regulates all public and private behaviour. It
has regulations for personal hygiene, diet, sexual conduct, and elements
of child rearing. It also prescribes specific rules for prayers,
fasting, giving to the poor, and many other religious matters. Civil Law
and Common Law primarily focus on public behaviour, but both do regulate
some private matters.
Shar'iah Law can also be
used in larger situations than guiding an individual's behaviour. It can
be used as guide for how an individual acts in society and how one group
interacts with another. The Shar'iah Law can be used to settle border
disputes between nations or within nations. It can also be used to settle
international disputes, conflicts and wars. This Law does not exclude any
knowledge from other sources and is viewed by the Muslim world as a vehicle
to solve all problems civil, criminal and international.
Shar'iah Law has several
sources from which to draw its guiding principles. It does not rely upon
one source for its broad knowledge base. The first and primary element
of Shar'iah Law is the Qur’an. It is the final arbitrator and there
is no other appeal. The second element of Shar'iah Law is known
as the Sunna, the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad not explicitly found
in the Qur’an. The Sunna are a composite of the teachings of the Prophet
and his works. The Sunna contain stories and anecdotes, called Hadith,
to illustrate a concept. The Qur’an may not have
all the information about behaviour and human interaction in detail;
the Sunna gives more detailed information than the Qur’an.
The third element of Shar'iah
Law is known as the Ijma. The Muslim religion uses the term
Ulama
as a label for its religious scholars. These Ulama's are consulted
on many matters both personal and political. When the Ulama's reach
a consensus on an issue, it is interpreted as Ijma. The concepts
and ideas found in the Ijma are not found explicitly in the Qur’an
or the teachings of the Prophet (Sunna). Islamic judges are able to examine
the Ijma for many possible solutions which can be applied in a modern
technical society. They are free to create new
and innovative methods to solve crime and social problems based upon the
concepts found in the Ijma.These judges have great discretion
in applying the concepts to a specific problem.
The Qiyas are
a fourth element of Shar'iah Law. The Qiyas are not explicitly found
in the Qur’an, Sunna, or given in the Ijma. The
Qiyas
are
new cases or case law which may have already been decided by a higher judge.
The Shar'iah judge can use the legal precedent to decide new case law and
its application to a specific problem. The judge can use a broad legal
construct to resolve a very specific issue. For example, a computer crime
or theft of computer time is not found in the Qur’an or Sunna. The act
of theft as a generic term is prohibited so the judge must rely on logic
and reason to create new case law or Qiyas.
The fifth element of Shar'iah
Law
is very broad and "all encompassing." This secondary body of knowledge
may be ideas contained in the other written works. The New Testament is
an example of this area of information, and legal discourses based upon
Civil Law or Common Law may be another example. All information can be
examined for logic and reason to see if it applies to the current case.
It also may be a local custom or norm that judge may find helpful in applying
to the issue before him. The judge may also weigh the impact of his decision
upon how it will effect a person's standing in the community.
Crimes
in Islam
Crimes under Islamic Law can
be broken down into three major categories. Each will be discussed in greater
detail with some common law analogies. The three major crime categories
in Islamic Law are:
1. Hadd [plural
Hudud]
Crimes (most serious).
2. Tazir Crimes (least
serious).
3. Qesas Crimes (revenge
crimes restitution).
Hadd crimes are the most
serious under Islamic Law, and Tazir crimes are the least serious.
Some Western writers use the felony analogy for Hadd crimes and
misdemeanor label for Tazir crimes. The analogy is partially accurate,
but not entirely true. Common Law has no comparable form of Qesas crimes.
Fairchild, in her excellent
book on comparative justice, makes the following observation of Islamic
Law and punishment (Fairchild, p.41).
Punishments are
prescribed in the Qur’an and are often harsh with the emphasis on corporal
and capital punishment. Theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation
of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it is committed . .
.
Hadd
Crimes
Hadd crimes are those
which are punishable by a pre-established punishment found in the Qur’an.
These most serious of all crimes are found by an exact reference in the
Qur’an to a specific act and a specific punishment for that act. There
is no plea-bargaining or reducing the punishment for a Hadd crime.
Hadd
crimes
have no minimum or maximum punishments attached to them.
The
punishment system is comparable to the determinate sentence imposed by
some judges in the United States. If you commit a crime, you know what
your punishment will be. There is no flexibility in the U.S. determinate
model or in the punishment for Hadd crimes of Islamic Law.
No judge can change or reduce
the punishment for these serious crimes. The Hadd crimes are:
1. Murder;
2. Apostasy from Islam
1. (making war upon Allah
and His messengers)
1. Theft
2. Adultery
3. Defamation
2. (false accusation of adultery
or fornication)
1. Robbery
2. Alcohol-drinking [any intoxicants]
The first four Hadd crimes
have a specific punishment in the Qur’an. The last three crimes are mentioned
but no specific punishment is found (Schmalleger, p.603).
Some more liberal Islamic
judges do not consider apostasy from Islam or wine drinking as Hadd
crimes.
The more liberal Islamic nations treat these crimes as Tazir
or
a lesser crime.
Hadd crimes have fixed
punishments because they are set by God and are found in the Qur’an. Hadd
crimes are crimes against God's law and Tazir crimes are crimes
against society. There are some safeguards for Hadd crimes that
many in the media fail to mention. Some in the media only mention
that if you steal, your hand is cut off. The Islamic judge must look at
a higher level of proof and reasons why the person committed the crime.
A judge can only impose the Hadd punishment when a person confesses
to the crime or there are enough witnesses to the crime. The usual number
of witnesses is two, but in the case of adultery four witnesses are required.
The
media often leaves the public with the impression that all are punished
with flimsy evidence or limited proof. Islamic law has a very
high level of proof for the most serious crimes and punishments. When there
is doubt about the guilt of a Hadd crime, the judge must treat the
crime as a lesser Tazir crime. If there is no confession to a crime
or not enough witnesses to the crime, Islamic law requires the
Hadd
crime to be punished as a Tazir crime.
Tazir
Crimes
Modern Islamic Society has changed
greatly from the time of the Prophet. Contemporary Shar'iah Law is now
in written form and is statutory in nature. Islamic concepts of justice
argue that a person should know what the crime is and its possible punishment.
For example, Egypt has a parliamentary process which has a formal penal
code written and based upon the principles of Islamic Law, but Saudi Arabia
allows the judge to set the Tazir crimes and punishments. Modern
Islamic Law recognizes many differences between these two nations. It also
allows for much greater flexibility in how it punishes an offender. The
major myth of many people is that judges in Islamic nations have fixed
punishments for all crimes. In reality the judges have much
greater flexibility than judges under common law.
Tazir crimes are less
serious than the Hadd crimes found in the Qur’an. Some common law
writers use the analogy of misdemeanors, which is the lesser of the two
categories (felony and misdemeanor) of common law crimes. Tazir
crimes can and do have comparable "minor felony equivalents." These "minor
felonies" are not found in the Qur’an so the Islamic judges are free to
punish the offender in almost any fashion. Mohammed Salam Madkoar, who
was the head of Islamic Law at the University of Cairo, makes the following
observation (Ministry of the Interior, 1976, p.104):
Tazir punishments
vary according to the circumstances. They change from time to time and
from place to place. They vary according to the gravity of the crime and
the extent of the criminal disposition of the criminal himself.
Tazir crimes are acts
which are punished because the offender disobeys God's law and word. Tazir
crimes can be punished if they harm the societal interest. Shar'iah Law
places an emphasis on the societal or public interest. The assumption of
the punishment is that a greater "evil " will be prevented in the future
if you punish this offender now.
Historically Tazir
crimes were not written down or codified. This gave each ruler great flexibility
in what punishments the judge was able to dispense. The
judge under Islamic Law is not bound by precedents, rules, or prior decisions
as in common law. Judges are totally free to choose from any
number of punishments that they think will help an individual offender.
The only guiding principle for judges under Shar'iah Law is that they must
answer to Allah and to the greater community of Muslims. Some of the more
common punishments for Tazir crimes are counselling, fines, public
or private censure, family and clan pressure and support, seizure of property,
confinement in the home or place of detention, and flogging.
In some Islamic nations,
Tazir
crimes are set by legislative parliament. Each nation is free to establish
its own criminal code and there is a great disparity in punishment of some
of these crimes. Some of the more common Tazir crimes are: bribery,
selling tainted or defective products, treason, usury, and selling obscene
pictures. The consumption of alcohol in Egypt is punished much differently
than in Iran or Saudi Arabia because they have far different civil laws.
Islamic
law has much greater flexibility than the
Western media portrays. Each judge
is free to punish based upon local norms, customs, and informal rules.
Each judge is free to fix the punishment that will deter others from crime
and will help to rehabilitate an offender.
Qesas
Crimes and Diya
Islamic
Law has an additional category of crimes that common law nations do not
have. A Qesas crime is one of retaliation. If you commit
a Qesas crime, the victim has a right to seek retribution and retaliation.
The exact punishment for each Qesas crime is set forth in the Qur’an.
If you are killed, then your family has a right to seek Qesas punishment
from the murderer. Punishment can come in several forms and also may include
"Diya." Diya is paid to the victim's family as part of punishment.
Diya
is an ancient form of restitution for the victim or his family. The family
also may seek to have a public execution of the offender or the family
may seek to pardon the offender. Traditional Qesas crimes include:
1. Murder (premeditated
and non-premeditated).
2. Premeditated offences
against human life, short of murder.
3. Murder by error.
4. Offences by error against
humanity, short of murder.
Some reporters in the mass media
have criticized the thought of "blood money" as barbaric. They labelled
the practice as undemocratic and inhumane. Qesas crimes are based upon
the criminological assumption of retribution. The concept of retribution
was found in the first statutory "Code of Hammurabi" and in
the Law of Moses in the form of "an eye for an eye." Muslims add to that
saying "but it is better to forgive." Contemporary
common law today still is filled with the assumptions of retribution.
The United States federal code contains "mandatory minimum" sentences for
drug dealing, and many states have fixed punishment for drugs and violence
and using weapons. The United States justice system has adopted a retribution
model which sets fixed punishments for each crime. The
idea of retribution is fixed in the U.S. system of justice. Qesas
crime is simple retribution: if one commits a crime he knows what the punishment
will be.
Diya has its roots
in Islamic Law and dates to the time of the Prophet Mohammad when there
were many local families, tribes and clans. They were nomadic and travelled
extensively. The Prophet was able to convince several tribes to take a
monetary payment for damage to the clan or tribe. This practice grew and
now is an acceptable solution to some Qesas crimes.
Today, the Diya is
paid by the offender to the victim if he is alive. If the victim is dead,
the money is paid to the victim's family or to the victim's tribe or clan.
The assumption is that victims will be compensated for their loss. Under
common law, the victim or family must sue the offender in a civil tort
action for damages. Qesas law combines the process of criminal and
civil hearings into one, just as the "civil law" is applied
in many nations of the world. Qesas crimes are compensated as restitution
under common law and civil law.
The Qesas crimes require
compensation for each crime committed. Each nation sets the damage before
the offence and the judge then fixes the proper Diya. If an offender
is too poor to pay the Diya, the family of the offender is called
upon first to make good the Diya for their kin. If the family is
unable to pay, the community, clan or tribe may be required to pay. This
concept is not found in common law or the civil law of most nations. It
acts as a great incentive for family and community to teach responsible
behaviour. What happens to the debt if the offender dies and
has not paid it? Historically, it was passed on to the offender's heirs.
Today, most nations terminate the debt if the offender left no inheritance.
One question that is often
raised is "What happens if a victim takes the Diya without government
approval?" The victim or family has committed a Tazir crime by accepting
money which was not mandated by a judge: taking Diya must be carried
out through proper governmental and judicial authority.
Another concept of Qesas
crimes is the area of punishment. Each victim has the right to ask for
retaliation and, historically, the person's family would carry out that
punishment. Modern Islamic law now requires the
government to carry out the Qesas punishment. Historically,
some grieving family member may have tortured the offender in the process
of punishment. Now the government is the independent party that administers
the punishment, because torture and extended pain is contrary to Islamic
teachings and Shar'iah Law.
Conclusions
Contemporary treatment of Islamic
Law and "Radical Muslims" is filled with stereotypical characterizations.
Some in the Western media have used the "New York City bombings" as a way
to increase hate and prejudice. They have taken the views of a few radicals
and projected them onto all Muslims. This action has done a great disservice
to the Muslim world. Some academic writings also have been distorted and
not always completely accurate and some researchers have concluded that
Islamic Law requires a fixed punishment for all crimes. These writers also
have concluded that Islamic judges lack discretion in their sentences of
defendants in the Shar'iah Court System. There are four Hadd
crimes that do have fixed punishments set forth in the Qur’an, but not
all the Hadd crimes are bound by mandatory punishment.
Islamic Law is very different
from English Common Law or the European Civil Law traditions. Muslims are
bound to the teachings of the Prophet Mohammad whose translation of Allah
or God's will is found in the Qur’an. Muslims are held accountable to the
Shar'iah
Law,
but non-Muslims are not bound by the same standard (apostasy from Allah).
Muslims and non-Muslims are both required to live by laws enacted by the
various forms of government such as tax laws, traffic laws, white collar
crimes of business, and theft. These and many other crimes similar to Common
Law crimes are tried in modern "Mazalim Courts." The Mazalim
Courts
can also hear civil law, family law and all other cases.
Islamic
Law does have separate courts for Muslims for "religious crimes" and contemporary
non-religious courts for other criminal and civil matters.
Selected Bibliography
Al-Alfi, Ahmad Abd al-Aziz "Punishment
in Islamic Criminal Law" found in Bassiouni, M. Cherif. The Islamic Criminal
Justice System, New York: Oceana Publication, Inc.,1982. pp. 227-236.
Al-Thakeb, Fahed and Scott,
Joseph E. "Islamic Law: An Examination of its Revitalization." British
Journal of Criminology. Vol.21, No.1 (Jan.1981),pp.58-69.
Ali, B. "Islamic Law and
Crime: The Case of Saudi Arabia." International Journal of Comparative
and Applied Criminal Justice. Vol.9, No.2 (Winter, 1985) pp. 45-57.
Badr, Gamal Mouri, "Islamic
Law: Its Relation to Other Legal Systems." The American Journal of Comparative
Law. Vol. 26 (1978), pp. 187-198.
Bassiouni, M. Cherif. Editor.
The Islamic Criminal Justice System. New York: Oceana Publications, Inc.,1982.
Doi, Abdur Rahman I. Shariah:
The Islamic Law. London: Ta-Ha Publishers, 1984.
Doi, Abdur Rahman I. Shariah
in the 1500 Century of Hijra Problems and Prospects. London: Ta-Ha Publishers,
1981.
El-Awa, Mohamed S. Punishment
in Islamic Law: A Comparative Study. Indianapolis: American Trust Publishers,
1982.
Ezeldin, Ahmed Galal. "Judicial
Control of Policing in Egypt." CJ International Vol. 7, No.4 (July-August,
1991), pp. 3,4.
Fairchild, Erika S. Comparative
Criminal Justice Systems. Belmont, CA.: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1993.
Fitzgerald, S.V. "The Alleged
Debt of Islamic Law to Roman Law." The Law Quarterly, Vol. 67. (Jan.,1951),
pp. 81-102.
Ghanem, Isam. Outlines of
Islamic Jurisprudence. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Saudi Publishing and Clearing
House, 1983.
Griffiths, Curt Taylor. "The
Criminal Justice System of Egypt." International Criminal Justice Systems
II, Omaha, Nebraska: Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, 1986, pp. 13-26
Hassan, Rittat. "Muslims
in America: A Living Presence." Horizons. (November/December, 1990), pp.10-11
Heer, Nicholas. editor, Islamic
Law and Jurisprudence. Seattle, WA.: University of Washington Press. 1990.
Khadduri, Majid and Herbert
J. Liebesny, eds. Origin and Development of Islamic Law, Volume 1 of Law
in the Middle East. ed. Majid Khadduri and Herbert J.Liebesny. New York:
AMS Press,1984.
Laliwala, Jafer Ismail. The
Islamic Jurisprudence. India: The India Institute of Islamic Studies.
Lamb, David. The Arabs: Journeys
Beyond the Mirage. New York: Vintage Books, 1987.
Lippman, Matthew and McConnville,
Sean and Yerushalmi, Mordechai. Islamic Criminal Law and Procedure and
Introduction. New York: Praeger, 1988.
Masud. Muhammad Khalid. Islamic
Legal Philosophy. Pakistan: Islamic Research Institute, Reprint 1984.
Mernissi, Fatima. The Veil
and the Male Elite. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.,
1987.
Moore, Richter H. "Islamic
Legal Systems: A Comparison-Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Pakistan." Comparative
Criminal Justice Chicago, IL.: Office of International Criminal Justice,
1989., pp.243-250.
Moore, Richter H. "The Criminal
Justice System of Saudi Arabia." International Criminal Justice Systems
II. Omaha, Nebraska: Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences, 1986., pp.139-198.
Qadri, Anwar Ahmad. A Sunni
Shafi'i Law Code. Sh. Muhammad Ashraf. (Available at Mahmud's Bazaar, P.O.
Box 505, Conley, GA 30027)
"Rising Fundamentalist Movement
Takes Centre Stage." CJ International Vol.8, No. 2, (March-April, 1992),
p.1-6.
Schmalleger, Frank. Criminal
Justice Today. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ.: Peentice Hall, 1993.
Trojan, Carol. "Egypt: Evolution
of a Modern Police State". Comparative Criminal Justice. Chicago, IL: Office
of International Criminal Justice, University of Illinois at Chicago, 1989,
pp.235-242.
Ward, Dick. "Fanatic Fundamentalism
Brings Renewed Strife and Concern in Region." CJ International, Vol.9,
No.2 (March-April, 1993), pp.14.
Weiss, Bernard. "Interpretation
in Islamic Law: The Theory of Ijtihad." The American Journal of Comparative
Law, Vol. 26, (1978),pp.199-212.
United Nations Social Defense
Research Institute. The Effect of Islamic Legislation on Crime Prevention
in Saudi Arabia. Proceedings of the Symposium held in Riyadh. 16-21 Shariah
1396 A.H.(9-13 October, 1976) Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Ministry of Interior,
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 1980.
|