1- Islam is not a religion that advocates brutality. On the contrary it calls
for mercy, clemency and toleration. Nevertheless it insists on establishing law
and order in the community so as to safeguard the freedom and the rights of its
members, and to protect their lives, their belief, their wealth their
possessions and their families.
When Islam imposes a certain punishment for a specific sin, it takes into consideration two factors :
When Islam imposes a certain punishment for a specific sin, it takes into consideration two factors :
(a) Man is not infallible, but is constantly exposed to temptation. Thus the
door of repentance is always open to those who regret having committed sins and
repent and desire to atone.
(b) Every member of the community is entitled to live a life of safety and to
feel that he, his family and his property are not exposed to any kind of
danger. Thus the depraved or corrupted behaviour of criminals should be dealt
with accordingly, so that the peace loving members of the community would
not live in a state of fear and apprehension.
2-
Although Islam has made laws to punish crimes, it calls for decisive proof of
the guilt of the accused person before passing sentence on him and does not
enforce the punishment if there is any possibility of doubt concerning his guilt.
Also if any guilty person repents sincerely of his sin, the sentence can be
suspended if the judge is convinced of the sincerity of the accused. The
prophet said:“Try to prevent enforcing the penalty on Muslims whenever it is
possible to do so, and should there be the slightest doubt as to the guilt of
the accused person, set him free. It is far better that a judge errors in
remitting the penalty than erring in enforcing it”.
Such
an authentic saying from the Traditions of the prophet is the essence of mercy
and tolerance.
3-
The penalty for adultery in Islam depends on a certain condition that makes it
almost impossible to enforce. The condition is that the act of adultery must be
witnessed by four people who must swear that they saw the act committed.
Accordingly the two incidents in the history of Islam when this penalty was
enforced were the result of the confession of the guilty parties and not of the
evidence of witnesses. The Prophet did his utmost to try and persuade the
guilty persons to change their statements in which they confessed their guilt
but they confirmed them and the prophet was accordingly compelled to order
enforcing the penalty, in spite of his profound grief. In view of the condition
stipulated and the extreme difficulty of fulfilling it, such a punishment never
occurred again in the history of Islam.
4- Islam does not cut off the hand of a starving person who steals to feed
himself or to feed his starving children. Islam punishes the thief who steals
the money or possessions of hard working people who earn their living honestly.
Such a thief spreads evil in the community and deserves no sympathy or mercy
from any body for he himself had no mercy or sympathy for the people whom he
robbed. In fact the victim might have been in dire need of the money stolen
from him, and every community is entitled to have laws enforced that ensure its
safety and stability . When this penalty was imposed in Islamic communities,
the crime of theft occurred so infrequently that merchants left their goods
unguarded and people did not lock the doors of their house. On the other hand,
theft is widespread and rampant in communities where lenient measures are
taken against it, with the result that theft has become a serious problem in
many communities .
5- The reason for imposing the penalty for theft is to ensure social justice
and to abolish poverty , which would prevent people from resorting to theft. It
is significant to note that the second Orthodox Caliph, Omar ben Al khattab,
suspended the penalty incurred by theft in the year that famine struck the
Islamic states . During the first years of Omar ben Al khattab’s reign, the
penalty for theft was justly enforced with the result that the crime of theft
and highway robber were so rare that the people who travelled from Mecca to
Syria were perfectly safe and feared no one but God Almighty and the
possibility that their sheep might be attacked by wolves. This state of
stability existed because every thief knew what his punishment would be and
thought a thousand times before committing the crime of theft or any other
crime with the result that the punishment for theft was very rarely enforced.
Which then is preferable? A law abiding community that lives in peace without
fear even if a few criminals are punished, or a community that lives in fear
while its prisons are crowded with criminals? With whom should we sympathize?
The criminal or the members of the community?