Jurisprudential and Legal Analysis of Criminal's Satisfaction in Article 384 of the Islamic Penal Code enacted in 1392 HS

Legislation is very serious and precise, especially where a human soul is involved. According to Article 384 of the Islamic Penal Code; if one person intentionally kills two or more people and the blood avengers of all the slain want Qiṣāṣ, the murderer will be retaliated without paying Diya. If the blood avengers of some of the victims want Qiṣāṣ and the blood avengers of the victim or other victims want blood money, if the murderer agrees to pay them blood money in exchange for their Qiṣāṣ, their blood money will be paid from the murderer's property and without the murderer's consent, they do not have the right to take blood money from him or his property. The point to consider in this legal article is that the payment of Diya from the property of the criminal to the victim is bound to the consent of the criminal. The basis of this opinion of the legislator is the opinion of some jurists. The present article in a descriptive-analytical research, with a problem-oriented view, follows the legal study of criminal’s satisfaction in this legal article and the analysis and critique of its jurisprudential principles. One of the most important findings of the study is that the discussion of criminal’s satisfaction in Article 384 of the Islamic Penal Code needs to be reviewed and revised by the legislator because it is incompatible with the rule of justice, the rule of “The blood of Muslim is not wasted”, the rule of obligation to save lives and other jurisprudential rules.

Ayatollah Yusuf Sanei’s Contribution to the Discourse of Women’s Rights

Ayatollah Yusef Sanei was a prominent contemporary Shia scholar whose particular methodological approach led him to issue some of the most progressive Shia fatwas on the subject of women’s rights. However, the ideas he expressed in the last decades of his life have scarcely been addressed in the English language scholarship. This article explores Sanei’s broader jurisprudential approach and how he applied it to analyzing and often challenging traditional Shia rulings related to gender issues. The article first differentiates Sanei’s approach towards jurisprudence from established methodologies, particularly in relation to his consideration of the Sunna as secondary to the Qurʾān, his rejection of the practice of using consensus as an independent basis of legal rulings, his idea that Sharia rulings may change over time, and his strong emphasis on the Qurʾān’s messages of justice and human dignity. The article illuminates how this combination led Sanei to challenge traditional ideas about men’s authority over women, a fixed socio-political role for women, and men’s superiority in the areas of divorce rights, testimony and worth in blood money (dīya), while concurring with earlier scholars on the unequal division of inheritance. Notwithstanding this latter exception, the article demonstrates that Sanei drew upon jurisprudential approaches in arguing in favor of equality between men and women in many areas.

Retribution: القصاص

Retribution is the punishment of the intentional perpetrator with the same action which is the focus of our research, which is the killing of one life for one life, and God Almighty has prescribed it to protect society because of its relationship to the security system and without it, chaos and turmoil would take place. The research aims to enlighten Muslims about retribution, show the mercy and pleasure of Islam, clarify the reasons that prevent retribution after it is obligatory or its nullification. The researcher used the inductive approach in this research. The field of research is the jurisprudence of felonies, penalties, and retribution. This study showed that there are conditions for retribution that must be fulfilled and observed. The holy Qur’an, the Sunnah and consensus impose retribution and, its requirements, its nullification, the wisdom of instituting retribution, blood money if necessary, and pardon may be due to blood money or may be free. Islam also considers conditions that obstruct retribution, such as the absence of requirements of retribution or reconciliation. Islam has urged pardon, which indicates the tolerance of Islam.

Payment of Diya (Blood Money) in Multiple Intentional Murders by One Murderer in the Light of the Jurisprudential Rule of Justice

One of the effective jurisprudential rules in the process of inferring the religious law is the rule of justice. Although this term has been used in the works of jurists of recent times, but jurists of various periods have used this rule in various issues. One of the things that needs to be covered by this rule is the issue of intentional murders, which occur multiple times and have a specific murderer. The well-known opinion of Shi’a jurists is only the Qiṣāṣ (retribution) of the murderer. While it seems that this rule is not necessary for the rule of justice. The clear question is whether the rule of justice plays a role in this case. Or that the religious rulings in this regard should be considered devotionally, and in the next stage, if justice has a place, is it necessary to retaliate, or should a blood money be paid to all the avengers of blood? The purpose of this article is the jurisprudential analysis of this issue in the light of the rule of justice. Because in the intentional murder of one person, several people of the victim's family have been harmed in two ways that the revenge of the murderer has only one aspect and the aspect of compensation is remained. Or assuming that Qiṣāṣ is fair, the compensation is for one murder and not several murders. One of the most important findings of the research is that the rule of justice can play a role as a basic and pivotal rule in relation to the religious rules and by observing the element of time and place.

Mapping Saudi Criminal Law

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.