Comparative Criminal Law With Islamic States
1. Introduction
Islamic states often integrate Sharia law into their criminal justice systems, either fully or partially. However, the application of Islamic criminal law varies significantly depending on historical, cultural, and political contexts.
Some countries implement strict hudood punishments (Quranic fixed punishments), while others apply a hybrid of Islamic and secular laws.
2. Key Features of Criminal Law in Islamic States
Hudood crimes: Fixed punishments for offenses like theft (sariqa), adultery (zina), false accusation (qadhf), alcohol consumption (khamr), apostasy (ridda).
Tazir crimes: Discretionary punishments for crimes not covered by hudood.
Qisas and Diyya: Retributive justice (qisas) and blood money compensation (diyya) in cases of murder and bodily harm.
Evidentiary standards: High burden of proof, including the requirement of multiple eyewitnesses for hudood punishments.
Due process: Varies, with some countries ensuring procedural rights while others emphasize religious authority.
Detailed Case Law and Examples from Islamic States
✅ Case 1: Pakistan – The Hudood Ordinances and the Zina Cases
Background:
Pakistan introduced the Hudood Ordinances in 1979, criminalizing adultery and fornication under Islamic law.
Case Details:
In several cases, women who reported rape were charged with zina if they could not produce four male witnesses to the act.
Notably, in the case of Dr. Shazia Khalid (2005), a female doctor who reported being raped faced severe social and legal challenges under the hudood regime. The high evidentiary standard made convictions for rape difficult, often resulting in victims being charged with adultery.
Legal Implications:
Criticism mounted internationally and domestically over the misuse of hudood laws.
Amendments were made in 2006 to shift rape cases back to secular laws, though challenges persist.
Significance:
This case highlights the tension between Islamic evidentiary standards and modern human rights protections.
✅ Case 2: Saudi Arabia – The Case of Raif Badawi (2014)
Background:
Raif Badawi, a Saudi blogger, was sentenced to 1,000 lashes and 10 years imprisonment for "insulting Islam" and apostasy under Saudi criminal law based on Sharia.
Legal Context:
Saudi Arabia applies a strict interpretation of hudood and tazir punishments. Apostasy is punishable by death or severe corporal punishment.
The case involved discretionary punishments (tazir) as interpreted by the religious courts.
International Reaction:
The case attracted global condemnation for violating freedom of expression and human rights.
Significance:
Shows the strict application of Islamic criminal law in Saudi Arabia, blending hudood and discretionary tazir punishments, with limited procedural protections.
✅ Case 3: Iran – Qisas and Diyya in Murder Cases
Background:
Iran’s criminal law incorporates qisas (retribution) and diyya (blood money) in homicide cases.
Case Details:
In a 2012 case, the family of a murder victim pardoned the accused in exchange for diyya, leading to the accused’s release.
Courts emphasize the victim’s family’s rights in deciding punishment, reflecting Islamic principles of justice.
Legal Framework:
Qisas allows the victim’s family to demand equal retaliation (e.g., death penalty) or accept compensation (diyya).
The principle gives families significant power over criminal outcomes.
Significance:
Highlights the role of Islamic principles in shaping retributive justice and victim participation.
✅ Case 4: Indonesia – Implementation of Sharia Criminal Law in Aceh Province
Background:
Aceh, a special autonomous province in Indonesia, applies Islamic criminal law alongside Indonesian secular law.
Case Details:
In 2017, a man was publicly caned for gambling, a hudood offense under Aceh’s Qanun (local Sharia law).
The case was prosecuted under religious courts with local community involvement.
Legal and Social Context:
Indonesia is largely secular but allows Aceh to implement Islamic criminal law as part of autonomy agreements.
Hudood punishments such as caning are used but with strict procedural safeguards.
Significance:
Shows a hybrid model where Islamic law is regionally applied within a secular national legal system.
✅ Case 5: Sudan – Application of Hudood in Theft Cases
Background:
Sudan’s 1991 Criminal Code included hudood punishments for theft, including amputation of a hand.
Case Details:
In a 2013 case, a man convicted of theft faced amputation. The court applied strict evidentiary standards requiring witnesses and proof of conditions (e.g., theft value).
Legal Debate:
Sudanese courts often delayed or commuted hudood punishments due to difficulty meeting evidentiary thresholds.
Post-2019 political changes led to reforms removing corporal punishments.
Significance:
Shows the tension between hudood application and evolving human rights norms.
✅ Case 6: Malaysia – Syariah Courts and Criminal Offenses
Background:
Malaysia operates dual legal systems: secular criminal courts and Syariah courts handling Muslim personal and criminal law.
Case Details:
In 2014, a Muslim woman was fined and sentenced to caning for drinking alcohol, a crime under Syariah law.
Appeals centered on jurisdictional conflicts between secular and religious courts.
Legal Context:
Syariah courts have limited jurisdiction but apply hudood punishments for Muslims.
Procedural safeguards and evidentiary standards vary by state.
Significance:
Demonstrates coexistence and conflicts between secular and Islamic criminal laws within one country.
Summary Table of Cases
| Country | Case / Year | Crime Type | Islamic Criminal Law Element | Key Outcome / Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pakistan | Hudood Ordinance cases | Zina (Adultery/Rape) | Hudood (fixed punishments) | Misuse led to reform; evidentiary challenges |
| Saudi Arabia | Raif Badawi (2014) | Apostasy, Insulting Islam | Hudood/Tazir punishments | Strict corporal punishments; human rights concerns |
| Iran | 2012 murder case | Murder | Qisas and Diyya | Victim family’s right to pardon or retribution |
| Indonesia (Aceh) | 2017 public caning | Gambling | Regional Hudood implementation | Hudood applied in regional autonomy with safeguards |
| Sudan | 2013 theft case | Theft | Hudood (amputation) | Courts cautious in applying hudood; reforms followed |
| Malaysia | 2014 drinking alcohol case | Alcohol consumption | Syariah law, Hudood-like | Dual legal system; jurisdictional complexities |
Conclusion
Comparative criminal law in Islamic states reveals:
A wide spectrum of hudood and Sharia law implementation.
Varying degrees of procedural protections and human rights compliance.
The balance between religious prescriptions and modern legal norms differs based on political, cultural, and historical contexts.
Cases illustrate how evidentiary standards, victim rights, and due process are shaped by Islamic law in ways distinct from secular legal systems.
RELATED Blog
0 comments