Review in corporal punishments in the light of re-reading the rule of coexistence of Reason and Sharia

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Professor, Criminal Law and Criminology, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

2 PhD student, criminal law and criminology, Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran

3 PhD student, criminal law and criminology, Tehran University International Campus, Kish, Iran

Abstract

Abstract
The meaning of the Mulazemah rule is the overlapping of reasoning and Sharia. That is, whatever the intellect approves of it can also be enforced by the Sharia, and whatever the Sharia accepts, the intellect also supports it. The present research is based on the descriptive-analytical method and relies on the recent reality in the effort to legitimize the transition from violent criminal punishment, a goal that is achieved through deliberation in the discussed base. In this regard, the authors have come to the conclusion that the human mind of today, which can be found in international human rights documents, does not tolerate corporal punishment. Therefore, since based on the discussed rule, the intellectual findings are considered as Sharia rules, then such human rights achievements should be paid attention to. On the other hand, the Sharia is also compatible with reasoning and intellect .In this sense, in order to objectify what has been just stated , the jurisprudence rulings must be reread in the light of the purposes of the Sharia, because the purposes of the Sharia (life, reason, dignity, fairness, justice, etc.) are fixed, but human understanding of these concepts is dynamic and current. Therefore, it must be paid attention to what the intellectual perceptions of each generation is in the mentioned concepts. In that sense, today, the rulings that are considered contrary to reasoning and intellect are invalid according to Sharia law. This solution makes Sharia equal to reason and provides the needs and necessities of today's society. As a result, it is possible to revise the implementation of corporal punishment under the shadow of the discussed rule.

Introduction

Among the most prominent approaches in Iran's criminal policy in the last four decades, there has been the use of corporal punishments in the Islamic penal laws, which have been appeared in the form of Hudud, Qisas and Ta’azirat. In this regard, it seems that the idea of ​​their immortality, which is imprinted in the legislator's mind, was one of the most important proofs of immunity from the abolition of these reactions, especially the Hudud and Qisas, during the time. However, the mentioned thought has been associated with numerous philosophical and sociological challenges in these years, both international and national wise. Therefore, such punishments have been criticized from different inner-religious perspectives and also outer-religious perspectives. The current research is also in line with the introduction and expansion of the recent discussion, that is, the criticism of torturous punishments, in an effort to reread a rule that is referred to as "Mulazemah" or "Talazom" in jurisprudence and principles sources. In the works of the predecessors, no independent work can be found regarding the connection of the mentioned rule with the field of punishments. Therefore, the current article is in search of rereading and extending it to this area. Therefore, the most important question of the current research is how to overcome corporal punishment by relying on the principle of Mulazemah.
 

Methodology

This research has been written using the descriptive-analytical method and with the approach of documentarystudies.
 

Results and Discussion

1- Corporal punishments are incompatible with the principles of the contemporary world, including human rights, so international organizations react to how it has been implementing in Islamic countries, including Iran. Also, such punishments have significant consequences for the Islamic society, including the generating of violence. Also, based on the available statistics, the mentioned punishments have not been able to reduce or even control crimes in the society.
 2- Islamic Sharia is legible, so it is possible to present a human right reading of it, at least in the discussion of punishments. In this regard, one of the ways of harmonizing Islamic laws and regulations with the rules and principles of human rights is to pay attention to the principle of Mulazemah.
3- The theme of the Mulazemah rule is the overlapping of reasoning and Sharia. That is, whatever the intellect approves is also enforced by the Sharia, and whatever the Sharia accepts, the intellect also supports it.
 
4- Reasoning and intellect is one of the four arguments and one of the sources of inference in Islamic law.
 5- Intellect is a living and dynamic entity that can have different achievements over time. One of today's intellectual achievements is human rights. In this regard, it is not necessary for contemporary mankind to rely on the intellectual findings of ten centuries ago.
 6- Islamic law is interpretable. Giving meaning to the recent reality is possible through the interpretation of the rules of Islam in the light of the purposes of Sharia. Due to the fact that only in this way it is possible to meet the needs of every age.
 7- Examples of the purposes of the Sharia such as justice, dignity, fairness, etc., are consistent in terms of vocabulary, however the concept and perception of each era can be different from another. Therefore, one should pay attention to the perception of each era of a concept. This solution makes Sharia equal to reasoning and provides the needs and necessities of today's society.
 

Conclusions

As a result, it can be said that today’s traditional reading of the rule of Mulazemah has blocked the possibility of using it, because the premise is that the series of rulings that came from the past eras have reached the hands of today's mankind. In any case, it is equal to reason, and therefore, if man's reason and intellect does not accept a rule in the current days, it is a problem with his understanding. That is, if a rule is written or signed by the Shariah, this ruling is definitely equal to reason, even if he does not understand it at the time. Therefore, a rule such as whipping s is both in accordance with Sharia and in accordance with reason in all times and places.
The writers of these lines believe in the equality of reason and law and the infallibility of this claim, but they have another interpretation of reason and law; A dynamic commentary that affirms the immortality of "the compatibility of reason and Sharia, as well as Sharia and reason". From the point of view of the authors, the meaning of reason in this rule cannot always be the human reasoning and intellect in the age of descent. In other words, although the rulings established or signed were without a doubt equal to the human intellect of that time, but in the sense of closing the case, the rulings are not particularly ungodly like punishments. Therefore, if today’s human intellect does not confirm a ruling, we should not pass this intellectual achievement simply and without reflection. The same event that happened regarding corporal punishments and the human mind does not reflect it today. The proof of the recent claim are the provisions of various human rights documents, in which the last will of the present man is manifested, and today it can be referred to as "Sira Oqala”. Most countries in the world include such considerations in their domestic laws; Because the violation of such rules is associated with the reactions and punitive actions of other actors in the international arena. Therefore, although a topic like human rights in today's sense has never been discussed in the past, but as some jurists have stated, its appearance in today's world cannot be a proof of its invalidity, but can be an example, rather, it can be an example of the reason mentioned in the rule of Mulazemah.
Regarding Sharia, we also believe that in order to recognize Sharia rulings, one must pay attention to the purposes of Sharia law and recognize Sharia rulings in the light of that. The purposes of Sharia include self, religion, reason, justice, human dignity, and anything alike those, which must be included in their criteria to determine whether a ruling can fall under the category of Sharia. For example, in order to determine that a punishment such as stoning is in the category of Shariah, we must weigh it with human dignity, as one of the supreme goals of Shariah. It should be kept in mind that the mentioned purposes are fixed, but human understanding of them is variable. In this way, human perceptions of a word are changeable over time. For example, in the past, a punishment such as taking life was not a violation of human dignity so that its followers would ignore the purposes of the Sharia, but today's intellect does not consider it to a significant extent as an intellectual. Therefore, against the purposes of Sharia, criminal reactions can be considered as historical rulings and appropriate to previous societies. Therefore, it is possible to leave aside the jurisprudence rulings that are contrary to the current state of affairs and, relying on the purposes of the Sharia, reread the texts according to the current time and place. Through such an interpretation, it is possible to consider reasoning with Sharia and Sharia with reasoning. The conclusion is that the alignment of reason and Sharia makes the transition from corporal punishment in today's world possible, so the Islamic legislator should come up with a new reading of the discussed rule in the effort of rethinking the ruling penal policy.
 

Selection of References

Bandura, Albert (1969), Principles of Behavior Modification, New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Denson, Thomas f (2021), “Breaking the Cycle of Violent Crime and Punishment: The Promise of Neuronormalization”, Social Issues and Policy Review, Volume 15, Issue 1, January, pp.237- 276.
Fazli, Mahdi., & Darabipanah, Shahin (2016), “The Analysis of Effects of Imprisonment on Prisoners Based on Gabriel Tarde’s Imitation Laws”, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology4(7), pp.5-32
Maldar, Mohammad Hassan, Javan Ja’afari Boojnordi, Abdolreza and Sadati, Seyyed Mohammad Javad (2021), Qisas in the Duality of Stability Oriented and Functionalist Readings, Criminal Law Research, 12(1), pp.151-174.
Maldar, Mohammad Hassan and Javan Ja’afari Boojnordi, Abdolreza (2019), “Rethinking and Generalization of evidence to Prohibition of Ḥudūd execution in enemy's territory in the Contemporary World”, Islamic Law, Jurisprudence and Methodology, 6(3), pp.95-121.
Omidi, Jalil (2010), “The Prophetic Tradition and Criminal Justice”, Law Quarterly39(4), pp.21- 34.
Razavi Fard, Behzad (2011), “International Criminal Law and the Fields of Formation of an International Criminal Policy”, Criminal Law Doctrines, Volume 8, Number 1, Spring and Summer, pp.171- 202.
Wheeler, Caleb. H (2018), “Rights in Conflict: The Clash between Abolishing the Death Penalty and Delivering Justice to the Victims”, international criminal law review, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp.345- 375
Zakir Hossein, Mohammad Hadi (2018), “Thematic Prosecution Doctrine as a Factor in the Gravity Assessment at the International Criminal Court”, Criminal law and Criminology Studies48(1), pp.85-106. 
Ziyaei Far, Saeid (2020), “The Primary Rule of the Novel Intellectual Conducts Authority in Non-servitude Issues”, Islamic Law, Jurisprudence and Methodology5(4), pp.7-27. 

Keywords

Main Subjects


منابع
ابوزید، نصرحامد (1383)، نقد گفتمان دینی، ترجمه حسن یوسفی اشکوری و محمد جواهرکلام، تهران: یادآوران.
امیدی، جلیل (1388)، «سنت نبوی و عدالت کیفری»، فصلنامه مطالعات حقوق خصوصی، دوره 39، شماره 4،صص. 21- 34.
بشیر، حسن و حسینی، سید بشیر (1391)، «کارکرد الگویی شخصیت‌پردازی بر مخاطب؛ مطالعه موردی عروسک باربی»، دین و ارتباطات. دوره 19، شماره 41، بهار و تابستان،صص. 5- 35.
پرادل، ژان (1383)، «بدنبال جهانی­شدن حقوق کیفری»، ترجمه محمدمهدی ساقیان، مجله پژوهش حقوق و سیاست،  دوره 6، شماره 11،صص. 159- 179.
جوادی آملی، عبدالله (1375)، فلسفه حقوق بشر، چاپ نخست، قم: اسراء.
حاجیان فروشانی، زهره و قراملکی، علی مظهر و امام، سید محمدرضا (1399)، «پویایی فقه از رهگذر مقاصد شریعت با نظری بر آرای امام خمینی (س)»، پژوهشنامه متین، دوره 86، شماره 22،صص. 31- 52.
حر عاملی، محمد بن حسن (بی­تا)، وسائل ­الشیعه، جلد 28، قم: مؤسسه آل البیت علیهم السلام لإحیاء التراث.
ذاکرحسین، محمدهادی (1397)، «نظریه‌ی «تعقیب موضوعی» به­ عنوان معیار سنجش شدت و اهمیت موضوع قابل تعقیب در دیوان کیفری بین­المللی»، مطالعات حقوق کیفری و جرم شناسی، دوره 48، شماره 1،صص. 85- 106.
ذهنى تهرانى، سید محمدجواد (1388)، بیان المراد، شرح فارسى بر اصول الفقه‌، جلد 3، قم: گنجینه ذهنی.
ربانی گلپایگانی، علی (1393)، «تلازم حکم عقل و شرع»، قبسات، سال 19، شماره 71،صص. 5- 26.
رضوی­فرد، بهزاد (1390)، «حقوق کیفری بین­المللی و زمینه­های شکل­گیری یک سیاست جنایی بین­المللی»، آموزه­های حقوق کیفری، دوره 8، شماره 1،صص. 171- 202
سروش، عبدالکریم (1385)، بسط تجربه نبوی، چاپ پنجم، تهران: صراط.
سلیمی، علی و داوری، محمد (1387)، جامعه‌شناسی کجروی، چاپ چهارم، تهران: پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه.
سید مرتضی (1415ق)، الانتصار فی انفرادات الإمامیه، چاپ نخست، قم: موسسه نشر اسلامی.
شیخ کلینی (1407ق)، الکافی، جلد 1، چاپ چهارم، تهران: دار الکتب الإسلامیه.
شیخ صدوق (1413ق)، من لا یحضره الفقیه‌، جلد 4، چاپ چهارم، قم: دفتر انتشارات اسلامى وابسته به جامعه مدرسین حوزه علمیه قم‌.
صافی‌گلپایگانی، لطف‌الله (1412ق)، الاحکام الشرعیه ثابته لا تتغیر، قم: دار القرآن کریم.
صرامی، سیف‌الله (1380)، «عقل قطعى، منبع استنباط قوانین اداره جامعه و حکومت»، مجله حکومت اسلامی، شماره 20.
ضیایی­فر، سعید (1399)، «قاعده اولی حجیت سیره­های عقلایی جدید در غیر عبادات»، جستارهای فقهی و اصولی، دوره 5، شماره 4،صص. 7- 27.
عباسی­نژاد، حسین و صادقی، مینا و رمضانی، هادی (1393)، «بررسی رابطه جرائم اجتماعی و متغیرهای اقتصادی در ایران»، فصلنامه برنامه­ریزی و بودجه، سال 19، شماره 3،صص. 69- 92.
عزیزی، امیرمهدی، میرخلیلی، سید محمود و نجفی ابرند آبادی، علی حسین (1401)، «کیفرگذاری کرامت مدار در مدل مردم سالار سیاست جنایی»، پژوهشنامه حقوق کیفری، دوره 13، شماره 1،صص. 177- 204.
علیدوست، ابوالقاسم (1379)، «فقه و عقل»، قبسات، دوره 5، شماره 15- 16،صص. 30- 41.
غزالی، ابوحامد (1413ق)، المستصفی من علم الاصول، چاپ نخست، لبنان: دار الکتب العلمیه.
فاضل مقداد (1404ق)، التنقیح الرائع لمختصر الشرائع، جلد 1، قم: مکتبه آیه الله المرعشی النجفی.
فضلی، مهدی و دارابی‌پناه، شهین (1395)، «تحلیل آثار حبس بر زندانیان زن در پرتو نظریه «قوانین تقلید» گابریل تارد»، پژوهش­های حقوق جزا و جرم شناسی، دوره 4، شماره 7،صص. 5- 32.
فنایی، ابوالقاسم (1395)، اخلاق دین­شناسی پژوهشی در باب مبانی اخلاقی و معرفت‌شناسانه فقه، تهران: نگاه معاصر.
قاری ­سیدفاطمی، سیدمحمد (1382)، «معاهدات حقوق بشر فضایی متفاوت»، مجله حقوقی بین­المللی، شماره 28،صص. 5- 44.
کبریتی، محمدجواد و نوبهار، رحیم (1399)، «رویکرد تجربی به مجازات؛ چشم­اندازی اسلامی»، نشریه علمی مطالعات حقوقی معاصر، سال 11، شماره 20،صص. 261- 290.
کدیور، محسن (1388)، حق­الناس (اسلام و حقوق بشر)، چاپ چهارم، تهران: کویر.
گرجی، ابوالقاسم، سید کاظم، حائری و مجتهد شبستری، محمد (1373)، «اقتراح»، نقد و نظر، شماره 1،صص. 14- 106.
مالدار، محمدحسن، جوان جعفری بجنوردی، عبدالرضا و ساداتی، سید محمدجواد (1400)، «کیفر قصاص در دوگانگی قرائت موضوعیت‌گرا و کارکردگرا»، پژوهشنامه حقوق کیفری، دوره 12، شماره 1،صص. 151- 174.
مالدار، محمدحسن و جوان جعفری بجنوردی، عبدالرضا (1399)، «بازخوانی و تعمیم ادله منع اجرای حدود در سرزمین دشمن در جهان معاصر»، فصلنامه جستارهای فقهی و اصولی، دوره 6، شماره 3،صص. 95- 121.
مجتهد شبستری، محمد (1390)، نقدی بر قرائت رسمی از دین (بحرانها، چالشها، راه­حلها)، چاپ چهارم، تهران: طرح نو.
مجلسی، محمدباقر (1403ق)، بحارالانوار، جلد 78، بیروت: دار احیاء التراث العربی.
محمدی، ابوالحسن (1390)، مبانی استنباط حقوق اسلامی (اصول فقه)، چاپ 38، تهران: انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
محمدی ری‌شهری، محمد (1375)، میزان الحکمه، جلد 3، قم: دارالحدیث.
مدنی تبریزی، سید یوسف (1384)، الفوائد القمیه فی القرآن و الدعاء و الذکر و بعض المسائل المتفرقه، تهران: دفتر آیةالله مدنی تبریزی.
مطهری، مرتضی (1390)، مجموعه آثار 1 (عدل الهی، انسان و سرنوشت، علل گرایش به مادیگری)، جلد 21، تهران: صدرا.
منتسکیو، شارل دو (1349)، روح‌القوانین، چاپ ششم، تهران: امیرکبیر.
منتظری، حسینعلی (1387)، پاسخ به پرسش‌هایی پیرامون مجازات‌های اسلامی و حقوق بشر، چاپ نخست، قم: ارغوان دانش.
منتظری، حسینعلی (1388)، اسلام دین فطرت، تهران: نشر سایه.
منتظری، حسینعلی (1394)، رساله حقوق، تهران: نشر سرایی.
موسوی بجنوردی، سید محمد (1378)، ‌مجموعه ‌مقالات‌ و‌ مصاحبه­های ‌علمی کنگره‌ امام‌ خمینی (ره)، قم‌: موسسه تنظیم و نشر آثار امام خمینی (س).
موسوی خمینی، سید روح‌الله (1427ق)، أنوار الهدایه فی التعلیقه علی الکفایه، جلد 1، چاپ سوم، تهران: مؤسسه تنظیم و نشر تراث الإمام الخمینی‌(س).
نوری، میرزا حسین (1408ق)، مستدرک الوسائل و مستنبط المسائل، جلد 18، چاپ اول، بیروت: موسسه آل­بیت (ع).
Bandura, Albert (1969), Principles of Behavior Modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Denson, Thomas f (2021), “Breaking the Cycle of Violent Crime and Punishment: The Promise of Neuronormalization”, Social Issues and Policy Review, Volume 15, Issue 1, January, pp.237- 276
Kamal Hassan, M (2018), Shariah and Its Meaning in Islam, in: Concept and Application of Shariah for the Construction Industry: Shariah Compliance in Construction Contracts, Project Finance and Risk Management, Edited by Khairuddin Abdul Rashid, Kiyoshi Kobayashi, Sharina Farihah Hasan and Masamitsu Onishi, Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co, pp.3- 13.
Wheeler, Caleb. H (2018), “Rights in Conflict: The Clash between Abolishing the Death Penalty and Delivering Justice to the Victims”, international criminal law review, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp.345- 375.
 
 
تارنما
ایرنا (1396)، «محسنی اژه‌ای: سو‌استفاده از فضای مجازی آمار قتل های فجیع را افزایش داده است»، تاریخ آخرین بازدید 1 مردادماه 1401، به آدرس https://www.irna.ir/news/82667667
ایسنا (1399)، «دلایل افزایش سرقت در سال‌های اخیر». تاریخ آخرین بازدید 1 خردادماه 1402، به آدرس https://www.isna.ir/news/99100301945
ایسنا (1393)، «آماری تکان‌دهنده از مصرف مشروبات الکلی». تاریخ آخرین بازدید 1 خردادماه 1402، به آدرس https://www.isna.ir/news/93071408181
مجله اینترنتی مددکاری اجتماعی (1395)، «جرائم مربوط به مصرف مشروبات الکلی پنجمین جرم کودکان و نوجوانان است | منزل، مسجد و مدرسه تنها مثلث تربیتی کودکان نیستند». تاریخ آخرین بازدید 1 خردادماه 1402، به آدرس https://b2n.ir/n05589
مدرسه فقاهت (1399)، « درس الفائق استاد محسن مرتضوی». تاریخ آخرین بازدید 1 خردادماه 1402، به آدرس
https://www.eshia.ir/feqh/archive/text/mortazavi_mohsen/alfaeq1/99/990708
Icc (2020), “Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, at the opening of the trial in the case against Mr Al Hassan Ag Abdoul Aziz Ag Mohamed Ag Mahmoud”, last modified  June 02, 2023,  https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-prosecutor-international-criminal-court-fatou-bensouda-opening-trial-case-against-0
 
پرونده دیوان کیفری بین­المللی
ICC (2019), Le Procureur c. Al Hassan, La Chambre Préliminaire I, 13 November 2019, No. ICC-01/12-01/18. https://www.icccpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2019_06927.PDF