Time Israel is punished for Gaza war crimes

gaza protest1BANDAR SERI BEGAWAN

AS PALESTINIANS prepare to approach the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutors for investigating Israeli war crimes in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rushed to the United States to discuss ways of keeping the spotlight off its actions in Gaza, according to The New York Post.

Netanyahu met a delegation of US lawmakers and requested that the US must use all the tools it has at its disposal to make sure the world knows that war crimes were not committed by Israel.

This is not new as the entire world knows that for decades, the US has always protected Israel by its veto at the UN Security Council. The US, the greatest upholder of human rights and individual freedom, has always looked the other way when it comes to Israeli crimes.

Ramsey Clark, an American lawyer, activist and former public official, once said that the greatest crime since World War II has been US foreign policy.

What has happened in Gaza is the best example of this foreign policy. Instead of condemning, the Israeli crimes, the US officials and media like Joseph Goebbels, kept repeating lies of Israel’s right to defend itself but all their lies fell flat.

From President Obama to Secretary of State John Kerry to the lowest US foreign policy official, all did not mention the right of defenceless people of Gaza whose families, homes, schools, hospitals were wiped out by the Israel bombing.

What Israel has done in Gaza, if it had happened in any other part of the world, the US would have been the first one condemn it, impose sanctions and order punitive military strikes. The irony is that the entire US public relations machinery has been working overtime to defend Israeli crimes.

The US officials have not spoken a single word about the illegal blockade that Israel has imposed on Gaza for more than five years, reducing it to world’s biggest open jail.

This illegal and inhumane Israeli blockade in itself constitutes a permanent act of war.

According to the Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal, this is the supreme crime that contains within itself every other crime, including terrorism.

But Kerry, in his interview to BBC Hard Talk, gave carte blanche to Israel by saying “the United States stands squarely behind Israel’s right to defend itself in those circumstances. Period”.

However when asked about the illegal Gaza blockade, like a seasoned diplomat, he refused to give a clear answer.

The hypocritical US human rights policy can be gauged from the fact that it has two policies – one for Israel and one for others.

But the Gaza war crimes is an open and shut case. One does not need any evidence as in this age of 24/7 television, the entire world witnessed Israeli war crimes in Gaza as it killed more than 2,000 defenceless Palestinians, including 400 children, injured more than 9,000 and made the Gaza residential areas look like Hiroshima.

It’s estimated that it will take 10 years and US$10 billion to rebuild the city.

Marjorie Cohn, a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, says for decades, Israel has slaughtered Palestinians with impunity, always protected by the US government and its veto at the UN Security Council.

But the latest bloody assault on Gaza has prompted more open talks about Israeli war crimes — and US complicity.

She says that by sending vast amounts of military aid to Israel, members of the US Congress, President George W Bush, President Barack Obama and Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel have aided and abetted the commission of war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity by Israeli officials and commanders in Gaza.

Cohn says an individual can be convicted of a war crime, genocide or a crime against humanity in the International Criminal Court (ICC) if he or she “aids, abets or otherwise assists” in the commission or attempted commission of the crime, “including providing the means for its commission”.

It’s high time that Israel be taken to task for violation of human rights of Palestinians by the United Nations.

The US, which has always come to the rescue of Israel by using its veto power, cannot practice double standards on the issue of human rights.

If it allows Israel to get away with war crimes, then it will lose moral rights to preach others about human rights.

Israel is an illegal occupier of Palestinian lands and the US must recognise this fact. Unless Israel withdraws from Palestinian territories, the Middle East will remain in turmoil.

The US has to respect and acknowledge the Palestinian sovereignty over their land otherwise it will not be seen as an impartial arbitrator.

The Brunei Times/Editorial
Monday, August 11, 2014

http://www.bt.com.bn/opinion/2014/08/11/time-israel-punished-gaza-war-crimes

The hysteria of Brunei’s sharia-based penal code

bru sy1Sheikh Alomgir Ali

ON the 30th of April 2014, the Sultan of Brunei announced the introduction of Islamic laws relating to criminal justice. May the 1st was the official enforcement date for the first phase of the ‘Syariah[1] Penal Code Order’, which incorporates Islamic laws into the existing criminal justice system. The Sultan stated: “Today I place my faith in, and am grateful to Allāh the almighty, to announce that tomorrow, Thursday 1st May 2014, will see the enforcement of sharī‘ah law phase one, to be followed by the other phases,” he said, according to the AFP news agency.

This incident can be discussed from a number of different angles, ranging from the motives of such a move to the overall method used to implement such measures. However, this article will primarily focus on two issues: an analysis of the reaction of the international community and a response to the reaction.

The reactions
From amongst the reactions, the UN’s human rights office said this month it was deeply concerned about the changes, alleging that women typically bore the brunt of punishment for crimes involving sex.

“It’s a return to medieval punishment,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director for Human Rights Watch. “It’s a huge step back for human rights in Brunei and totally out of step with the 21st century.”[2]

There were further statements of concern from the Ministry of Defence and other bodies as well. A spokesman for the Foreign Office said: “We are concerned about Brunei’s decision to introduce a sharia criminal code. Ministers have raised questions about the law’s implications and pressed for a lenient approach.”[3]

There was even a celebrity-driven boycott of a hotel owned by the Sultan of Brunei whereby people gathered outside the building holding placards with provocative and sensationalist statements like “Stop Brunei’s Taliban-like laws”[4] against the Sultan and his wish to implement laws derived from the same religion that the Taliban happen to follow.

Putting aside the case of Brunei for a moment, is it really wrong for an independent, autonomous nation to implement a system that it believes to be appropriate, especially if the majority of the people also wish for such a system?

Is it wrong to implement medieval rules?
Has the essence and the philosophy of the Islamic penal code been misunderstood and are Islamic laws barbaric and inhumane?

Is sharī’ah another term for the Islamic penal code?

It is critically important that we understand the reality of these questions and their answers because the above points are shaping the discourse of the current situation in Brunei.

‘Medieval Practices’

‘Backwards’, ‘outdated’, ‘stone age’ are all loaded terms that we often hear in the media with the aim to malign some of the teachings and practices of Islam. It is true that Islam promotes practices that were practiced centuries ago; however that does not necessarily mean that such practices are wrong or are no longer viable. In fact, in all societies you will find medieval practices, whether it be related to trade, like the use of currency, or penal code, like the concept of imprisonment, and so on.

In reality, such methods of argumentation are indicative of a fallacious method of debating; namely the use of the Argumentum ad Novitatem (appeal to novelty) argument.This is essentially when someone prematurely claims that an idea or proposal is correct or superior, exclusively because it is new and modern, and hence anything that is old is considered to be no longer viable. Investigation may prove these claims to be true for particular cases, but it is a fallacy to prematurely conclude this only from the general claim that all novelty is good. Although there may be correlations between novelty and positive traits in certain cases, like technology for example, we cannot make that an absolute reality for all matters in life, especially when dealing with values and traditions.

Muḥammad Quṭb noted that it is not surprising that many Europeans adopt such an argument since they had a very dark history that was marred by the oppression of the church and because they had experienced the ‘dark ages’.[5]

The opposite of an appeal to novelty is an appeal to tradition, in which one argues that the “old ways” are always superior to new ideas. This likewise is not an absolute truth as well, however as Muslims we must concede that certain laws and practices are more appropriate, not because they are older, but because they originate from the Divine and hence are the best for humanity whether we realise it or not. In the very first chapter of the Qur’ān Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) teaches us how to supplicate to him:

“Guide us to the straight path, the path of those whom you have favoured…”[6]

Notice how the past tense has been used to illustrate how we, as Muslims, should aspire to follow the footsteps of the righteous that came before us, by following their examples that were set for us.

The above point should serve as a strong lesson for Muslims who knowingly or unknowingly[7] lack confidence in the divine scripture and its injunctions. It is unfortunate that some minds hesitate in declaring the excellence and perfection of some of the laws of Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā), and in many cases this is due to their lack of certainty in Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā):

“But who is better than Allāh in judgment for a people who are certain [in faith]?”[8]

Therefore, the one who lacks certainty will be denied from seeing the excellence and perfection of the laws of Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā).

It is also interesting to note that the Argumentum ad Novitatem and its implications was used by the disbelievers during the time of the Prophet (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam):

“And among them are those who listen to you, but We have placed over their hearts coverings, lest they understand it, and in their ears deafness. And if they should see every sign, they will not believe in it. Even when they come to you arguing with you, those who disbelieve say, “This is not but legends of the former peoples.”[9]

This brings us to the next question:

Has the essence and the philosophy of the Islamic penal code been misunderstood?

The sharī’ah is the only real system that tackles the matter of crime and punishment from all angles at the same time. In Islam, dealing with crime doesn’t begin with confirming whether the crime was committed; rather it begins firstly by seeking to prevent crime from occurring in the first place in a unique manner. Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) and His Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) addressed the heart first to be conscious of Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) which would then impact the person’s behaviour:

“Indeed there is a morsel of flesh in the body; if it becomes sound the rest of the body will be sound, and if it becomes corrupt, the rest of the body will be corrupt. Indeed, that morsel of flesh is the heart.”[10]

He also (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said:

“Be conscious of Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) wherever you may be, and follow up a sin with a good deed and it will erase it, and behave well towards people.”[11]

It is also interesting to note that the relationship between man and law in secular societies is predominantly that of enforcement, whereas in Islam, it is essentially a matter of conscious and voluntary obedience. The difference in premise has a huge impact in the manner in which people interact with the law and which can be suitably exemplified by the Prohibition act in America in the early 1920s, in which the production and sale of alcohol was largely banned. The act led many people to go underground to produce and sell alcohol which eventually led to the flourishing of organised crime. However, when alcohol was prohibited during the time of the Prophet (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam), it was said that the streets of Madīnah were flowing with alcohol without the need of strict enforcement. This is because the hearts of the Muslims were conscious of an all-Seeing Creator who could see all of their hidden actions.

‘Ā’ishah (radiy Allāhu ‘anha) said:

“Know that the first thing that was revealed was a Sūrah from the mufaṣṣal[12] chapters, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire, and so when the people embraced Islam, the Verses regarding legal and illegal things were revealed. If the first thing to be revealed was: ‘Do not drink alcoholic drinks.’ people would have said, ‘We will never leave alcoholic drinks,’ and if there had been revealed, ‘Do not commit illegal sexual intercourse, ‘they would have said, ‘We will never give up illegal sexual intercourse’.”

This doesn’t mean that an Islamic society will be free from crime or that members of the society will be like angels. However, a society that has members that are God-conscious will naturally be more law-abiding and more distant from crime. This is because a godless society is more prone to crime if its people believe they can escape being caught and charged for crime.

Moreover, the intention of punishing someone for a crime is not to merely punish them, but also to deter people from committing the crime in the first place. Hence in an abstract sense the punishments for certain crimes may seem harsh, but in actuality they are serving a higher purpose in preventing the crime occurring.

Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) says regarding the law of retribution:

“And there is for you in legal retribution [saving of] life, O you [people] of understanding, that you may become righteous.”[13]

It is not sufficient to look at the criminal himself when he commits the crime, but the consequences it has on the society and the minds of others have to be taken into consideration. Whilst the threat of pain may be inflicted on some criminals, the overall benefit the society receives from that will be unimaginably greater, as can be seen from the virtually zero theft statistics historically in countries where this was applied.

Another aspect that has to be considered as well is that when a person is penalised under Islamic law it acts as expiation for the sin itself. The Prophet (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said regarding being penalised for certain crimes: “And whoever indulges in any one of them and gets punished for it in this world, that punishment will be an expiation for that sin. And if one indulges in any of them, and Allāh conceals his sin, it is up to Him to forgive or punish him (in the Hereafter).”[14]

bru syHaving such an attitude towards criminal law is what leads people to even confessing their crimes without even being caught! Take the example of Mā’iz bin Mālik (radiy Allāhu ‘anhu):

“O Messenger of Allāh! Purify me,” whereupon he said: “Woe to you, go back, ask forgiveness from Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) and turn to Him in repentance.” He (the narrator) said that he went back not far, then came back and said: “O Messenger of Allāh! Purify me.” Whereupon Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “Woe to you, go back and ask forgiveness of Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) and turn to Him in repentance.” He (the narrator) said that he went back not far, when he came back and said: “O Messenger of Allāh! purify me.” Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said as he had said before. When it was the fourth time, Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) asked: “From what am I to purify you?” He said: “From adultery”, Allāh’s Messenger saw) asked if he was insane. He was informed that he was not insane. He asked: “Has he drunk wine?” A person stood up and smelt his breath but noticed no smell of wine. Thereupon Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) asked: “Have you committed adultery?” He said: “Yes.” He then finally made a pronouncement about him and he was stoned to death.

The people had been divided into two groups about Mā’iz. One of them said: “He is destroyed for his sin has overwhelmed”, whereas another said: “There is no repentance more excellent than the repentance of Mā’iz, for he came to Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) and placing his hand in his hand said: ‘Stone me’.” This controversy about Mā’iz remained for two or three days. Then the Messenger of Allāh (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) came to them (his Companions) as they were sitting. He greeted them with salutation and then sat down and said: “Ask forgiveness for Mā’iz bin Mālik.” They said: “May Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) forgive Mā’iz bin Mālik.” Thereupon Allāh’s Messenger (sallAllāhu ‘alayhi wasallam) said: “He (Mā’iz) has made such a repentance that if that were to be divided among a nation, it would have been enough for all of them.”[15]

Is the Islamic Penal Code barbaric?

It must be made clear from the onset that the reason why Muslims primarily accept Islamic laws is because we believe that they are divine and it is a duty upon Muslims to accept them whether they agree with our inclinations or not. Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) says:

“Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that you hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing which is bad for you. Allāh knows, whilst you know not.”[16]

This is a point that differentiates a Muslim and a non-Mulim’s outlook of Islamic law. Therefore, for non-Muslims to appreciate our acceptance of Islamic law, they must understand that we do so because of our belief that Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) legislates for us laws that are best for us whether we realise their benefits or not. Otherwise, if our acceptance or rejection of Islamic law was based on our own personal preference, we would have no need for Divine guidance from Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) since it would have to be measured against our own personal preference.

“What is [the matter] with you? How do you judge? Or do you have a scripture in which you learn, That indeed for you is whatever you choose? Or do you have oaths [binding] upon Us, extending until the Day of Resurrection, that indeed for you is whatever you judge? Ask them which of them, for that [claim], is responsible.”[17]

Whilst man in the 21st century has achieved so much in terms of technology and advancement, there has been no other creation that has inflicted so much harm on the planet and its inhabitants more than the human race. Whether we realise it or not, our minds are limited in scope in determining what is best for mankind unless we seek guidance from the one who knows us the best: our Creator.

“Should He not know, He that created? And He is the One that understands the finest mysteries (and) is well-acquainted (with them).”[18]

Our views about what laws are best for mankind cannot be deemed correct by our mere conviction of them or our admiration of them. Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) says:

“[They are] those whose effort is lost in worldly life, while they think that they are doing well in work.”[19]

Hence, whilst some minds may consider certain Islamic laws as being barbaric, others will consider them to be the essence of justice, just like how a child may view certain disciplinary measures of his parents to be extremely harsh and unfair, but due to the wisdom and foresight of the parents, those measures are in the best interests of the child even though he may not realise that.

Thus, it has to be made clear that Allāh (subhānahu wa ta’ālā) may issue rulings that may differ with our deficient intellects. Therefore, the discourse surrounding the Islamic penal code should not revolve around whether it is barbaric or not, but rather whether it is truly Divine or not and where these laws originate from. This discussion can only be made fruitful though if we free ourselves from our own personal biases and inclinations.

Notes:
[1] Sharī’ah

[2] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/30/sultan-brunei-sharia-penal-code-flogging-death-stoning

[3] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/international-outcry-as-brunei-introduces-sharia-law-and-takes-country-back-to-the-dark-ages-9308088.html

[4] http://www.blogcdn.com/slideshows/images/slides/260/563/9/S2605639/slug/l/womens-rights-lgbt-and-human-rights-groups-protest-sultan-of-bruneis-human-rights-policies-1.jpg

[5] See Ḥawla Taṭbīq ash-Sharī’āh, by Muḥammad Quṭb p.76-101, Maktabah as-Sunnah, Cairo, Egypt.

[6] Al-Qur’ān 1:5-6

[7] Such as by calling for a suspension of the Islamic penal code without the desire to re-implement them or by claiming that the implementation of the penal code would oppose the higher objectives of the Sharī’ah.

[8] Al-Qur’ān 5:50

[9] Al-Qur’ān 6:25

[10] Agreed upon (Bukhāri and Muslim)

[11] Tirmidhi

[12] Chapters 50-114 of the Qur’ān according to one understanding of the scholars.

[13] Al-Qur’ān 2:179

[14] Al-Bukhāri

[15] Muslim

[16] Al-Qur’ān 2:216

[17] Al-Qur’ān 68:36-40

[18] Al-Qur’ān 67:14

[19] Al-Qur’ān 18:104

Ustadz Alomgir has a BA in Arabic & English language and has studied Arabic and Islamic studies in Cairo. He is currently pursuing a degree in Shariah at al Azhar University in Cairo. He has translated a number of books and holds weekly Tafseer classes in London and is a regular Khateeb in a number of mosques in London. He also taught Arabic and Islamic studies at the Tayyibun Institute in London and is currently an instructor for the Sabeel retreats and seminars.

DISCLAIMER: All material found on Islam21c.com is for free and is for information purposes only. All material may be freely copied & shared on condition that it is clearly attributed to Islam21c.com [hyperlinked] as the original source. The views expressed on this site or on any linked sites do not necessarily represent those of Islam21c.com

bru sy2http://www.islam21c.com

http://www.islam21c.com/politics/the-hysteria-of-bruneis-sharia-based-penal-code/

Lecture of Brunei’s State Mufti on the Islamic Criminal Law (Jenayah) (Full text)*

السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

الحمدالله رب العالمين ، وأصلى واسلم صلاة وتسليما يليقان بمقام
أمير الأنبياء وإمام المرسلين. أَمَّا بَعْدُ.

In the Audience of His Majesty Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Seri Baginda Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Mu‘izzaddin Waddaulah Ibni al-Marhum Sultan Haji Omar Ali Saifuddien Sa‘adul Khairi Waddien, Sultan and Yang Dipertuan of Brunei Darussalam.

Begging your pardon your Majesty,

With deep respect, your loyal subject seeks permission to fulfill the wishes of the Knowledge Convention Steering Committee and present the Inaugural Lecture at this convention. Your loyal subject also seeks permission to use the common language throughout this presentation.

Respected audience,

The topic given to me was in fact the theme of this Convention itself i.e.: “The Shari‘ah Criminal Law Ensures Justice And Security For Everyone.”

Indeed, there can be no doubt that the criminal law created by Allah guarantees justice for everyone and safeguards their well-being. Why is this so?

This is so because that is what Allah has determined, His Laws are for all, they are all-encompassing and ensure justice and security for everyone – Muslims or non-Muslims – everyone is protected by His Laws. The dzimmi, non-Muslims living in a Muslim territory, are never to be hurt, they are not to be tyrannised or persecuted by anyone; to do so is a sin. The Prophet Šallallâhu ‘alaihi wasallam has said:

مَنْ أَذَى ذِمّياًّ فَأنَاَ خَصْمُهُ، وَمَنْ كُنْتُ خَصْمَهُ خَصْمَتُهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ

Meaning: “Whoever harms a dzimmi, I am his enemy, and whoever makes me his enemy, verily he is my enemy on resurrection day.”

In fact, the Laws of Allah also extend to creatures other than man, safeguarding their interests and well-being too.

When the Prophet Šallallâhu ‘alaihi wasallam narrated about a man who had scooped up some water from a well in order to give a thirsty dog a drink, the companions asked: “Do we humans get rewarded for helping animals O Rasulullah”? The Prophet replied:

فِي كُلِّ كَبِدٍ رَطْبَةٍ أَجْرٌ (رواه البخاري ومسلم)

Meaning: “(Yes) there is a reward for every one with a moist liver (animal); if we help, we will be rewarded for it.”

This was the reason Sayyidina ‘Umar Radhiallâhu ‘anhu became angry with a person for overloading his camel with a heavy burden. He had also wept upon seeing underfed sheep that had become emaciated.

Thus is the mercy of Islam my friends! So wide and all-encompassing are the Laws of Allah for the good of the whole universe.

This world is replete with crime. Crime can cause anxiety and fear, it can rob us, and our country, of peace; crime can cause unrest that may then lead to the loss of honour and lives.

That is the nature of crime.

So what is Islam’s response to crime? What is the position of Allah towards crime?

The response from Islam is: Crime is a form of sin and whoever commits crime is punished. Meanwhile Allah has resolved that all punishments must be in accordance with His Laws. The person who punishes with other than His Laws is labeled “al-Kâfirûn”, for He says: ( : فَأُولۤئِكَ هُمُ الكَافِرُوْنَ They are unbelievers) and “azh-Zhâlimûn”, for He says: (فَأُولۤئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُوْنَ : They are oppressors/who are cruel) and “al-Fâsiqûn”, for He says: ) فَأُولۤئِكَ هُمُ الفَاسِقُوْنَ : They are sinners).

The Laws of Allah are incomparable to any other law. The Laws of Allah are full of wisdom and replete with secrets – with divine secrets. Wisdom and secrets are His, they belong to Him and as the Owner of wisdom and secrets it is impossible that Allah is mistaken, it is impossible for Allah to err in the creation of His Laws.

These are the Laws of Allah. They are stable, they never change. Indeed they do not need to change because their creator is not man but Allah Himself, who is Most Wise and All-Knowing of the requirements of the laws for us human beings.

Unlike us, who are weak, we create laws that last for only a year or two, or at the very most several decades, after which they change. Laws that are constantly changed and amended, even discarded, such as the “death penalty” for example, which was enforced once. Today, the more developed we are, the more disordered our thinking have become so much so that in 2007 the United Nations, yes, the United Nations, had obtained a “majority vote” to abolish the death penalty worldwide.

Look! This is us human beings but with Allah it is different. He has never wavered with the death penalty (Qišâš). It has been more than 1400 years since al-Qur’an was sent down yet the death penalty had never been withdrawn. It continues to persist and inshâ Allah it will continue till the end of time. Allah Ta‘ala says:

Translated: “O ye who believe! Retaliation is prescribed for you in the matter of the murdered. ” (البقرة: ١٧٨)

What is the rational, what can be the “great excuse” for abolishing the death penalty? People say on humanitarian grounds. The death penalty is cruel, inhumane and therefore it must be abolished.

Is that all? Yes, that is all.

Now it is our turn to ask: Where is the superiority of your rational: Compassion for the murderer but not for the murdered? Sympathising with the victimiser but not with the victim? Let’s say the victim was a husband, where is your sympathy for his wife, who has become a widow? And where is your sympathy for his children, who have become orphans? Where is your balance of justice? Is this fair – sympathising with the murderer and ignoring the murdered victim? You feel sorry for the murderer’s family more than you do for the murdered victim’s family? What justice is this; where is the logic and the superiority of such a law?

Many people only see the “death” in the Shari‘ah Criminal Law but Allah says: وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَّاة (within the qišâš retribution) there is life for you.

What does this guarantee of life mean here? It means that the effect of the penalty, if enforced, is that people will be afraid to become murderers, because if they kill, they will be killed. Therefore, if everyone does not want to kill for fear of the qišâš penalty, under which they will also be killed, does this not mean then killings will not occur? And if killings do not occur, does it not mean that lives will be safe and living will continue in society. Sadaqallâh al-Azhim. Most True is Allah Who has said: وَلَكُمْ فِي الْقِصَاصِ حَيَّاة.

Imagine if the death penalty is abolished, is it not the same as encouraging people to kill? There is nothing to fear anymore because if a person kills, his punishment is not death. Yes, who indeed will fear if the penalty for murder is merely a fine or an imprisonment? No one.

This is why we were very shocked to read that recently, in one of the countries in Latin America, more than 60,000 murders are committed in a year. 60 thousand, not 6 thousand but 60 thousand people are murdered per year!

Why? Why are there such a great number of people murdered in that country? We have yet to find the answer. Is it possibly due to the fact that the death penalty has been abolished there? If so then it proves that the decision to abolish the death penalty is not a step forward rather it is a shift backward in man’s thinking.

It appears that there is a tendency in today’s legislation to lighten the punishment even for such a serious crime as gang rape. This criminal activity is common and has recently occurred in a country, about a year ago, whereby six men had raped a student in a bus and ultimately caused her death. One of the rapists had committed suicide in prison while another was merely given a three-year jail sentence. Meanwhile, for the remaining four, after the citizens of the country protested that the criminals should be given a punishment befitting the crime, on 3 September 2013, we read that all four rapists were finally sentenced to death. This verdict was received with loud claps and cheers by members of the public that had crowded the Court at that time.

This incident is an illustration of man-made laws – one moment it is like this the next moment it is like that. What is obvious is that there is a tendency to be lenient in prescribing punishment.

For no rhyme or reason Islam has now been accused of being cruel. The Laws of Allah are considered irrelevant, harsh, inhumane and frightening.

In fact there are those who try to create trouble: “If Brunei implements its Shari‘ah Criminal Law then should we not worry that tourists may not come to Brunei for fear of their hands being cut?”

Astagfirullâh!

All right then, please listen to our answer: “Sir, do all potential tourists to Brunei plan to steal? If they do not then what do they need to fear? Believe me when I say that with our Shari‘ah Criminal Law everyone, including tourists, will receive proper protection; inshâ Allah, they will not be disturbed; inshâ Allah, their honour is safeguarded; inshâ Allah, their money is also guaranteed safe and inshâ Allah even their lives are safe.”

With the permission of Allah and with His mercy, this will come true.

This is not mere rhetoric! There are proofs. Allow us to illustrate: Long ago there were a lot of thefts, robberies and murders in the Hijaz Arabian Peninsula. Even the hajj pilgrims were not spared, they were attacked and robbed. But, after the Saudi Government implemented their Shari‘ah Criminal Law, crimes of thefts and burglary subsided. People were safe and free from thefts and robberies.

Now, who says people are afraid to go to Makkah? Who says tourists are afraid? No they are not! Every year, thousands of hajj pilgrims inundate Makkah, their numbers reaching two or three million, forcing the Saudi Government to limit the issuance of their quotas so as to control the deluge.

Who can deny this? Do you know, do you realise that this is what is called “barakah”, it is a sign that there is barakah [blessings] there. The Laws of Allah is not void, it is full of barakah. The Laws of Allah is not void, it is full of wisdom. We Bruneians have faith, we believe in barakah. Our King has faith and believes in barakah¸ and all of us Alhamdulillâh, have faith and we believe in barakah.

O mankind, fear not the Laws of Allah for Allah never errs as we err. Allah never ever forgets as we forget. Allah is never ever wrong as we are wrong. Therefore, do not doubt His Laws. Who are we to doubt the Laws of Allah? Yes indeed, Allah Himself has created His Laws for us, we should in fact be grateful and be thankful.

Let us not just look at the hand-cutting or the stoning or the caning per se but let us also look at the conditions governing them. It is not indiscriminate cutting or stoning or caning, there are conditions and there are methods that are just and fair.

It is perhaps appropriate for us to quote an example of caning here. The caning penalty is found in both legislations: Civil and Shari‘ah. Let us look at the difference between the civil caning and the shari‘ah caning.

A Prison Director has once revealed, which was reported in the Straits Times issue 13.9.74 and later quoted by the writer Kamaluddin bin Jamit in the magazine Dian Digest No: 159, published in June 1984, that the caning penalty in the civil criminal law leaves a mark and causes lifelong humiliation.

Under the present Prison Regulations caning is done only on the offender’s buttocks. Officers carrying out the punishment are carefully selected from among those who are big-sized, well-built, highly qualified self-defence personals. They are equipped with a cane that is ½ an inch thick and 4 feet long. During the caning, the warder does not only use the strength from his hand but also his whole body weight as well. As a result, the skin on the buttocks of the caned person will rip open after just three lashes, and the buttocks will be covered with blood. Usually, the offender will faint after the first three or four lashes.

Imagine if the lashes are tens of times or let us take the minimum 10 times; how many times will the offender faint, if he does not die?

The caning penalty is conducted in private. The offender will be stripped naked or dressed in only a piece of loincloth to cover the front; his ankles and hands tied to a wooden frame. This frame is ‘H’ shaped with the legs three feet apart. It is crucial to use a strong rope to secure the offender because usually, due to the great pain, the caned offender will shake and tremble violently.

This is caning under man-made law, which aims solely to punish and to torture the offender, as retribution for the crime committed.

It is very different from the caning penalty under the Shari‘ah Criminal Law. Under this law, the caning is more of a “spiritual therapy”, to teach and educate the soul so as to be humble and to repent. The lesson is not just for the offender alone but also for the rest of the society. This is the wisdom behind why shari’ah punishment is carried out in the open, unlike under the civil criminal law, where it is hidden and concealed.

Apart from evoking a sense of shame in the offender, this method of punishing in the open also leaves an impact on the society, which will heed the lesson of how humiliating, how painful and how embarrassing it is to be a criminal offender. Therefore those who have witnessed this punishment will surely be more careful and more afraid of committing a similar crime.

There is hardly any mercy in the civil criminal law. Everything is simply harshness and ruthlessness: the bounding, stripping naked and caning until the subject faints and is drenched in blood. Meanwhile, to ensure that the caning instrument does not break upon striking the offender’s buttocks, it is first soaked in water overnight before it is used.

Caning in Shari‘ah Criminal Law is different. Rasulullah Šallallâhu ‘alaihi wasallam had chosen an average cane, not too hard and not too soft. Sayyidina ‘Umar Radhiallâhu ‘anhu, someone who is well-known for being very strict in implementing justice, once reminded caners not to lift their hands to the extent of exposing their armpits while caning. In fact, according to a hadîth, the purpose of the caning is deemed to have been achieved by using the tip of a cloth or a handkerchief or a date stalk. If a date stalk is used, it must be of moderate size, not too old or too young. That is how shara‘ ruling has specified it.

Then there is the method of caning: It is not done with a hard swing of the hand, no! Rather, shara‘ says that it is sufficient for the hand to be raised slowly, not so high as to be above the head, and the lashes must be evenly distributed at the back, not on one spot only, as it is in the civil location that focuses only on the buttocks.

A little on how cases are handled. The Shari‘ah Criminal Law is very neat, very cautious and its conditions are very tight. Its method is very unique, refine and full of wisdom, for example in the case of zinâ there must be 4 witnesses and all four must be “‘âdil” [just]. What does ‘âdil mean? It is avoiding big sins and not committing small sins regularly. This is different from civil, which accepts whoever as a witness, including children and those who are fâsiq [sinners], even though they may clearly be sinful, they are still accepted as witnesses and their testimonies are adopted.

However, Shari‘ah Law does not accept, it does not accept these people, sorry! Regardless of how many of them there may be.

In order to understand how important witnesses are in a trial, let us look at this great incident which illustrates that justice is for all: How a Muslim judge does not discriminate, is not racist and is impartial in arbitrating between a Muslim and a non-Muslim.

An argument had ensued between Sayyidina ‘Ali bin Abi Talib and a poor Jew over an armour. ‘Ali had claimed that the armour was his while the Jew too had made a similar claim. Both had claimed the armour to be theirs.

The case was then brought to trial judged by judge, Shuraikh, who was appointed by Sayyidina ‘Umar, the Amirul Mu’minin.

Judge Shuraikh had asked ‘Ali to bring forth witnesses and so ‘Ali produced several witnesses, one of whom was his own son al-Hasan. Judge Shuraikh rejected al-Hasan as a witness for his father, saying to ‘Ali: “This is your son, bring forth another witness.” But ‘Ali could not produce another witness so judge Shuraikh resolved that the armour belonged to the Jew. ‘Ali lost the case solely due to a poor witness.

That was it! For the sake of justice, all of these are taken into consideration in the Laws of Allah Ta‘ala: The way a case is handled, the way it is resolved and the way punishment is carried out.

Related to the way a case is handled is the behaviour of the judge. In shara’, judges are not allowed to differentiate among those they are arbitrating, not even in terms of “seating”. The judge must seat them both in front of him, not both on his right or both on his left. If this happens then it means that one person will be nearer to the judge while the other will be further from him. Similarly, he should not seat one person on his right and the other on his left because the one on his right will surely feel that he is more honoured than his opponent and the one on the left will feel slighted and disrespected.

Sayyidina ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab and Ubai bin Ka‘ab were once in an argument over something and Zaid bin Thabit was arbitrating them. In court, Zaid gave a cushion to ‘Umar but not to Ubai. ‘Umar then said: “O Zaid, this is the beginning of your tyranny.” ‘Umar censured judge Zaid for giving him a cushion and not his opponent, Ubai.

Ah this was how the Laws of Allah were handled in court, very subtly, very neatly, absolutely clean and fair.

Similarly, before punishment is implemented all related matters are looked into, they are not neglected, as seen in this example:

Sayyidina ‘Umar Radhiallâhu ‘anhu was once approached by a pregnant woman who confessed to having committed adultery. Sayyidina ‘Umar had wanted to impose the penalty of 100 lashes but before the punishment could be carried out Sayyidina ‘Ali Karramallâhu wajhah appeared and said to ‘Umar: ويحك يا عمر، ويحك (Woe to you ‘Umar! Woe to you!). ‘Umar asked: “What is it ‘Ali? What is it?” Sayyidina ‘Ali replied:
كيف تجلدها وهي حامل؟ إن كان لك ولاية على جلد ظهرها، فليس لك ولاية على جلد ما في بطنها، إن ما في بطنها برئ ليس لك ولاية عليه، دعها حتى تضع حملها.

Meaning: “How can you cane this woman when she is pregnant? Even if you have the right to cane her back you do not have the right to cane the child that is in her stomach. It (the child) is clean, it is sinless. You have no right over it. Therefore free her until she delivers.”
The Supreme Judge, the Amirul Mu’minin was checked by ‘Ali, he was in fact advised by ‘Ali as to how to judge fairly – ‘Umar was advised by his friend, his subordinate.

What was ‘Umar’s response? Was ‘Umar willing to accept the comment or was he angry? Did he punish ‘Ali for being forward and for daring to correct him?

Let us look with the heart’s eye and let us listen to this paradise dweller. ‘Umar said:
لَوْلاَ عَلِيُّ لَهَلَكَ عُمَر. لَوْلاَ عَلِيُّ لَهَلَكَ عُمَرُ.
Meaning: “If there is no ‘Ali surely ‘Umar will perish. Without ‘Ali ‘Umar perishes.”

What does this mean? It means that ‘Umar accepted ‘Ali’s comment. He accepted ‘Ali’s advice. The Supreme Judge and the Amirul Mu’minin accepted ‘Ali’s advice, the advice of his subordinate. In fact not only did he accept the advice he had also openly declared that without ‘Ali, if it was not for ‘Ali, ‘Umar would surely perish. It is destruction for ‘Umar. What perishes, what is destroyed? It is destruction upon receiving punishment from Allah for having erred in implementing justice.

Do we see how these people of paradise are with the Laws of Allah Ta’ala? How they are with justice? Do we see this? They were extremely careful, they were not negligent and nothing stopped them from accepting advice, accepting correction and accepting suggestion for the sake of justice.
Who among the legislative leaders in today’s world can challenge the etiquette and nobility of our Muslim leaders ‘Umar and ‘Ali Radhiallâhu ‘anhumâ?

Begging your pardon your Majesty, this is the end of my Inaugural Lecture. Your humble servant seeks forgiveness for any unintentional error or impropriety. All that is good is from Allah, while the opposite is from your humble servant himself.

والله ولى التوفيق
والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

Honouring the bestowal.

The Brunei Times
Tuesday, October 22, 2013

statemufti

State mufti award

*Inaugural lecture by State Mufti of Negara Brunei Darussalam at the Opening of Majelis Ilmu (Knowledge Council) Seminar and Exhibition themed ‘Islamic Penal Code (Jenayah), International Convention Centre, Berakas, Bandar Seri Begawan.