Mapping Saudi Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chibli Mallat
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
The Body ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Law System ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Public Behavior ◽  
Blood Money

Abstract This Article maps the criminal law system in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia enacted a criminal procedure code in 2001, but it lacks a comprehensive penal code, relying instead on (i) identifications of certain acts as violations of the law (from public behavior to matters of the state administrative cogwheel) scattered in various pieces of legislation and (ii) the classical Islamic legal tradition’s classification forming a criminal Islamic common law which is organized into (a) “set punishment” prescribed crimes (hadd, plural hudud), (b) crimes left to the court’s discretion (ta‘zir), and (c) two other forms of “violations of the body” with their own legal regime (qisas/retaliation and diya/blood money). The Article is based on extensive case law released by the Saudi Ministry of Justice.

The Necessity Plea in English Criminal Law

1972 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 87-119 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. R. Glazebrook
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Penal Code ◽  
Sharp Contrast ◽  
Striking Feature ◽  
Vast Number ◽  
English Law ◽  
Prevention Of Crime

The sharp contrast between the vast number of detailed statutory provisions defining particular offences and the small handful of widely phrased provisions concerned with the general principles of criminal liability is, perhaps, the most striking feature of English criminal law, and, like the continued co-existence of both common law and statutory offences, one of the unhappy consequences of England's failure to enact a penal code. Among the few statutory provisions laying down general principles of liability or excuse there is none which comprehends a defence of necessity, and so commentators have inevitably looked to the case law for an answer to the question: Is there in English criminal law a defence of necessity? by which they have meant: Is there a defence of necessity in the sense in which there is a defence of, for instance, insanity, or infancy, or duress or prevention of crime? To the question understood in that sense, the answer returned must, it is thought, be a plain No. To ask and to answer the question in that sense may, however, be misleading: it may be more revealing (as this paper suggests) to ask, How does English law handle the plea of necessity when it arises? What, in other words, is the juristic technique employed?

scholarly journals RELIGIOSITY IN CRIMINAL LAW: ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Abdurrahman Raden Aji Haqqi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Body ◽  
Religious Ritual ◽  
Belief Statement ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Holy Quran ◽  
The Common ◽  
Human Kind

The fundamental premises of Islamic law are that Allah has revealed His will for human-kind in the Holy Quran and the inspired example of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him), and that society's law must conform to Allah's revealed will. The scope of Islamic law is broader than the common law or civil law. In addition to core legal doctrines covering the family, wrongs, procedure, and commercial transactions, Islamic law also includes detailed rules regulating religious ritual and social etiquette. In Islam, religiosity is not asceticism in monasteries nor is it chattering from the pulpits. Instead, it is behaving in a manner that is requested from the Creator under all circumstances, places and times, in belief, statement and actions. Historically, law and religion have never been completely separated. They have never been so independent as to achieve complete autonomy from each other. Religion has essentially been embodied in legal systems, even in those that have aspired to privatize religion. Based on this fact, this paper discusses such fact i.e religiosity on specific theme of Islamic law that is criminal law which means the body of law dealing with wrongs that are punishable in Islamic law with the object of deterrence.

scholarly journals PARADIGM OF DEATH PENALTY (COMPARATIVE STUDY IN INDONESIA, SAUDI ARABIA AND CHINA)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tedy Nopriandi ◽  
Risky Fany Ardhiansyah
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Capital Punishment ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Comparative Approach ◽  
Law System ◽  
The Right

The death penalty is one of old criminal type as the age of human life, and the most controversial crime in of all criminal systems, both in countries that adhere to the Common Law System and in countries that embrace Civil Law, Islamic Law and Socialist Law. There are two main thoughts about the death penalty, namely: first, those who want to keep it based on the force provisions, and second are those who wish to the abolition as a whole. Indonesia includes a country that still maintains capital punishment in a positive legal system. This paper aims to resolve problems of the death penalty concept concerning the controversy purpose of the death penalty and to analyze the regulations, procedures and philosophies regarding the death penalty in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia and China. This paper uses normative juridical research and the methods based on the doctrine and developed by the author. The approach used the legal approach, historical approach and comparative approach, then analyzed by the customary method.The result of the study shows that the death penalty can be seen from the philosophical aspects of Indonesian criminal law, as well as the philosophical aspects of Islamic and Chinese criminal law. So that everything can not be separated from the essential legal objectives, namely for the creation of justice. Death penalty in Islamic law turns out the concept of restorative justice specifically for the crime of deliberate killing (al-qatl al-'amd), which the execution highly depends on the victim’s family. The victim’s family, in this case, has the right to choose whether qisas (death penalty) or their apologize for the murder suspect, and diyat payment. While China in the implementation of death penalty applies the concept of rehabilitation, which in the execution of the death penalty is called a death penalty delay for two years and in its implementation, the defendant is given a job and control them. Whereas in Indonesia, capital punishment is a specific criminal offence and threatened with alternatives and is still a draft Criminal Code.

scholarly journals Legal Basis of Common Approaches to Object to a Criminal Judgment in Iran and England Penal Systems

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Ayatollah Yari ◽  
Hossein Mirmohammad Sadeghi
Keyword(s):  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Procedure ◽  
Direct Relation ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Criminal Trials ◽  
Law System ◽  
Procedure Code ◽  
Legal Foundations ◽  
The Law ◽  
System Today

One of the basic discussions in criminal procedure code which has a direct relation with defendants’ rights in civil procedure process is the matter of objection to criminal judgments that have seriously changed and transformed after the Islamic Revolution. According to the criticisms received by Iran's legal procedure system, the legislator has tried to make closer their position to the world’s standards in the field of objection to criminal judgments by referring to its former rules especially the law of criminal trials’ principles in the law of criminal procedure code approved in 2013. In addition to the final nature of the sentences in common law system, today, different ways of objection are predicted in England accusatory system. The present research tries to deal with the matter that on the prediction of common ways of objection how much its legal basis is considered and how much Iran and England legislators succeed in this path, in addition to analyzing the real examples of the ordinary ways of projection (objection, research appeal, and review appeal) and legal foundations of each one of them in two penal systems of Iran and England. The results of the cases above can be the guide of Iran's legislator in approving and reforming the regulations related to the objection the votes and approximating the regulations to world’s criteria in this field.

scholarly journals WHITE COLLAR CRIMES, CORRUPTION AND BRIBERY IN ISLAMIC CRIMINAL LAW: LACUNA AND CONCEIVABLE PATHS

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 711
Author(s):  
Mohamed A. 'Arafa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
White Collar ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Legal Issue ◽  
History Of ◽  
Muslim Intellectuals ◽  
Legal Attitudes

The Islamic legal system differs from other legal attitudes, as civil law traditions described by law’s codification or common law practices based on binding judicial precedents. In Islamic law, there is neither history of law’s classification, nor an understanding of binding legal precedents.  The process of ijtihad (analogical deduction) in Islamic (Sharie‘a) law, though, is alike to Case law model. In this regard, Muslim scholars have had over the interpretation of the Sharie‘a rules and divine (God)’s law based on the Qur’anic provisions and the authentic Sunnah (Prophet Mohammad) traditions.  The chief sources of Islamic criminal law are the Qur’an, Sunnah, ijma‘a (consensus), Qiyyas (individual reasoning) along with other supplementary sources.  Where the principles of the Qur’an and Sunnah do not sufficiently resolve a legal issue, Muslim intellectuals use Fiqh (jurisprudence) which is the process of deducing and applying Sharie‘a values to reach a legal purpose and its methodologies and implementation are many, as numerous schools of jurisprudential (Sunni and Shie‘aa) thought (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali) transpires.  Based on this succinct backdrop, this article will delve in elaborating the main principles of the Islamic criminal justice system regarding corruption and bribery from a descriptive viewpoint and will concludes that there is no real flaw between the Islamic system and the positive justice mechanisms. 

Problematic issues of qualifying criminal omissions

Law and World ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-96
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Main Element ◽  
Detailed Review ◽  
Law System ◽  
Common Law System

Criminal code of Georgia (7th article) defines crime. According to this article main element of a crime is an action. Action is also the first and the most important element of actus reus in Georgian criminal law. In this case, action includes not only criminal activity, but also criminal inaction. According to Georgian criminal law, there are two forms of inaction: typical inaction and mixed inaction. Mixed inaction is much more serious crime than typical inaction. While qualifying inaction the most important issue is the obligation on action, whether it was because of profession, previous action or special relations with the victim. The research includes detailed review of Georgian criminal law in the field of qualification of criminal inaction. Georgia belongs to continental law system. There is big difference in this field between continental law system and common law system. In continental criminal law system, every type of inaction is a crime, while in common law system, typical inactions, like leaving person without help in danger, is not a crime. Main aim of criminal law is to avoid harm of such values like life, freedom etc. That’s why it is important to prevent such harms. The research includes analyzing of this differences. The most important issue while qualifi cation of inaction is practice of Georgian Supreme Court. So, the re- search includes detailed review of Georgian Supreme Court decisions in this fi eld. To sum up, the research includes following issues: Theoretical research on qualifi cation of inaction, practical recommendations, review of Georgian Supreme Court practice, specifi cs of common law countries.

4 Personal and Property Rights

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bamford Colin
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Project Financing ◽  
Fund Management ◽  
Law System ◽  
Bond Issues ◽  
The Common ◽  
Financial Transactions

The chapter explores the differences between property rights and rights that can be enforced only by action against a person. It contrasts the position in common law systems with that in civil law countries. The common law system is explained by looking at the development of equity and of the concepts of equitable ownership and of the trust. The chapter then examines the distinction by reference to case law, particularly in relation to the mechanism of charge-backs. It then argues that the approach adopted by the common law is particularly well suited to the needs of financial transactions, in syndicated lending, bond issues project financing fund management and in allowing flexibility in the structuring of complex security arrangements.

Legality, Culpability and Dogmatik: A Dialogue between the ECtHR, Comparative and International Criminal Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (5) ◽  
pp. 823-860
Author(s):  
Giulio Vanacore
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
European Court ◽  
Constitutive Element

This article aims to analyse a peculiar interplay between the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), comparative and international criminal law. The discussion focuses on legality, foreseeability of the criminal nature of conduct, knowledge of a fact’s wrongfulness and mistakes of law. Starting from foreseeability as a constitutive element of legality in the ECtHR case-law, the author examines ‘knowability’ of a fact’s wrongfulness as a component of the Continental law Dogmatik category of culpability, the issue of ignorance in common law and the general interaction between the principles of legality and culpability. With regard to the International Criminal Court, there is a problematic need to establish a personal mental link between an individual’s actions and the system criminalising such action. In this context, the issue of foreseeability as applied to modes of liability has proven to be problematic. The upshot is this paper’s appeal for a truly international criminal Dogmatik.

scholarly journals RELIGIOSITY IN CRIMINAL LAW: ISLAMIC PERSPECTIVE

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 284
Author(s):  
Abdurrahman Raden Aji Haqqi
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Common Law ◽  
The Body ◽  
Religious Ritual ◽  
Belief Statement ◽  
The Family ◽  
The Holy Quran ◽  
The Common ◽  
Human Kind

The fundamental premises of Islamic law are that Allah has revealed His will for human-kind in the Holy Quran and the inspired example of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him), and that society's law must conform to Allah's revealed will. The scope of Islamic law is broader than the common law or civil law. In addition to core legal doctrines covering the family, wrongs, procedure, and commercial transactions, Islamic law also includes detailed rules regulating religious ritual and social etiquette. In Islam, religiosity is not asceticism in monasteries nor is it chattering from the pulpits. Instead, it is behaving in a manner that is requested from the Creator under all circumstances, places and times, in belief, statement and actions. Historically, law and religion have never been completely separated. They have never been so independent as to achieve complete autonomy from each other. Religion has essentially been embodied in legal systems, even in those that have aspired to privatize religion. Based on this fact, this paper discusses such fact i.e religiosity on specific theme of Islamic law that is criminal law which means the body of law dealing with wrongs that are punishable in Islamic law with the object of deterrence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document