Slava Novorossiya

Slava Novorossiya

Sunday, February 10, 2013

BLOOD MONEY: QISAS & DIYYA [RASHID AL-RASHIDI EXECUTED IN DUBAI, U.A.E (10 FEBRUARY 2011)]



            On this date, 10 February 2011, an Emirati Pedophile, Rashid Al-Rashidi was executed by the firing squad for the murder of a Pakistani boy, Moosa Mukhtiar Ahmed in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Please see here for the case.


             I would like to explain about my thoughts about blood money in Islamic countries, I will post the information from Wikipedia and some other links. I will speak about my thoughts on the execution and what is a fair trial in this case.


                Rashid Al-Rashidi
The path to the firing squad
- November 27, 2009: Rashid al Rashidi, 30, lures Moosa Mukhtiar Ahmed, four, into a mosque toilet, rapes him and kills him.

- November 28, 2009: Al Rashidi is arrested after fingerprints from the crime scene are matched to him.

- December 8, 2009: Prosecutors say they will seek the death penalty for al Rashidi if he is convicted.

- December 2009: Hamed al Khazraji, a court-appointed attorney, refuses to represent al Rashidi.

- January 2010: Abdullah al Midrib and his father, Abdel Rahman al Midrib, appointed to represent him.
- February 14, 2010: Mohammed al Saadi takes over the defence.

- January 29, 2010: al Rashidi is found guilty in the Dubai Criminal Court of First Instance and sentenced to death.

- April 1, 2010: The Court of Appeal upholds the conviction and sentence.

- June 7, 2010: al Rashidi loses his last appeal at the Court of Cassation

- February 10, 2011: al Rashidi is executed by firing squad.


Moosa Mukhtiar Ahmed
 MY THOUGHTS ON THE EXECUTION:
            I strongly agree with Singaporean defense lawyer, Subhas Anandan that no matter how heinous or evil the criminal is, they always must be a fair and proper trial. I was satisfied that Al-Rashidi was given a defense lawyer when the first lawyer refused to defend him. In this way, the trial would not only be fair but have a proper safeguard.

            Al-Rashidi was terrified when he met his end but I am glad that he at least repent of his crime. Although many people want pedophiles to pay with their lives, I deep have a bit of pity for Al-Rashidi. I always wish that criminals will always be repentant when they are near their deaths.

SEE THE TWO VIDEOS ON RASHID AL-RASHIDI:


QISAS

Qisas (or 'qesas') (Arabic: قصاص‎) is an Islamic term meaning "Equal Retaliation," and follows the principle of an eye for an eye, or lex talionis, first set forth by Hammurabi. In the case of murder, it means the right of the heirs of a murder victim to demand execution of the murderer.


O ye who believe, equivalence is the law decreed for ye when dealing with murder - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, the female for the female. If one is pardoned by the victim's kin, an appreciative response is in order, and an equitable compensation shall be paid. This is an alleviation from thine Lord and mercy. Anyone who transgresses beyond this incurs a painful retribution.


The Qur'an also allows aggrieved parties to forfeit the right of qisas as an act of charity or in atonement for sins.

Qisas is enforced today by states which follow Shari'a, including Saudi Arabia, Iran.

DIYYA

Diya (plural: Diyat; Arabic: دية‎) is financial compensation paid to the heirs of a victim. In Arabic, the word means both blood money and ransom.

Islamic and Arab tradition
The Qur'an specifies the principle of Qisas (i.e. retaliation), but prescribes that one should seek compensation (Diyya) and not demand retribution.

We have prescribed for thee therein ‘a life for a life, and an eye for an eye, and a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds retaliation;’ but whoso remits it, it is an expiation for him, but he whoso will not judge by what God has revealed, these be the unjust.

The Qur'an directed to pay Diyyat just according to this law both in case of intentional as well as un-intentional murder. A variation of Diyat was present in pre-Islamic Arabia, where it was paid in terms of goods or animals rather than cash. In Sharia law, Diyat should be paid in terms of cash to avoid possible fraud on the part of the criminal. In Islamic and Arab traditions, blood money is the fine paid by the killer or his family or clan to the family or the clan of the victim (comparable to the traditions of weregild and główczyzna). It is unlawful for a believer to kill a believer except if it happens by accident. And he who kills a believer accidentally must pay Diyyat to the heirs of the victim except if they forgive him. The tradition finds repeated endorsement in Islamic tradition; several instances are recorded in the Hadith, which are the acts of Muhammad.

There is no specific amount for Diyat and the fine does not differ based on the gender, victim, or state of freedom of the victim. However, the Qur'an leaves open its quantity, nature and other related affairs to the customs and traditions of a society. The Qur'an directs to pay Diyat according to this law both in case of intentional as well as unintentional murder.

The four Sunni legal schools of thought debated what should be the Diyya for a Jew or Christian, who were considered Dhimmi. According to the Shafi school, the Diyya in such a case was a third paid for a Muslim. The Maliki prescribed half. The Hanafi school, on the other hand, does not differentiate between a Muslim and non-Muslim. In Yemen, the Diyya for a Jew was sometimes much higher than for a Muslim, since he was considered a protege of the tribe, and any injury to him was considered injury to the whole tribe.

Legally prescribed rates
Countries whose law follows the Shari'a, including Saudi Arabia, Iran and Pakistan, also enacted laws for Qisas and Diyat. In Saudi Arabia, for example, the heirs of the victim have a right to settle for Diyya instead of the execution of the murderer. The customary law of the Somali people also recognizes the obligation of diyya, but define it as being between subgroups, or mag, who may be part of different clans or even the same clan.

Some of these countries also define, by lawful legislation, a hierarchy of rates for the lives of people; religious affiliation and gender are usually the main modulating factors for these Blood Money rates. Some examples are presented below.

Saudi Arabia
In Saudi Arabia, when a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the prescribed blood money rates are as follows:

·         300,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
·         150,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
·         150,000 riyals if a Christian or Jewish man
·         75,000 riyals if a Christian or Jewish woman
·         6,666 riyals if a man of any other religion
·         3,333 riyals if a woman of any other religion

The amount of compensation is based on the percentage of responsibility. Blood money is to be paid not only for murder, but also in case of unnatural death, interpreted to mean death in a fire, industrial or road accident, for instance, as long as the responsibility for it falls on the causer.

Iran
In Iran, a further refinement on the hierarchy of rates has been devised: variations are also based on the month of the Islamic calendar that the crime is committed in. The Iranian Judiciary system announces a table of the prescribed amounts each year. During the four haraam months, when wars and killings were traditionally discouraged in the Arabian Peninsula and later in the larger Islamic world, the blood money rates stand doubled. The rates for female victims is half that for male victims in murder cases, but equal in cases of insurance and accidental death.

As in Saudi Arabia, the rates for bloody crimes committed against Iranian non-Muslims used to be half the rate prescribed for Muslim victims, but this was changed by "equitable", progressive-minded legislation in early 2004. This legislation was initially rejected by the Guardian Council but was later approved by the Expediency Discernment Council. "In 2004 the Expediency Council approved appending a note to Article 297 of the 1991 Islamic Punishments Act, authorizing collection of equal "blood money" (diyeh) for the death of Muslims and non-Muslims."

However, members of the Bahá'í Faith are excluded from the provisions of the equalization legislation and as such no blood money is payable to families of Baha'is who are murdered. "All women and Baha'i men were excluded from the equalization provisions of the bill. According to law, Baha'i blood is considered Mobah, meaning it can be spilled with impunity."

Further information: Religious freedom in Iran

Iraq
In Iraq, the Bedouin tribes carry on the practice of demanding blood money, though this does not necessarily obviate the proceedings of the secular judicial system.

MY THOUGHTS ON BLOOD MONEY:
            If anybody ask me if I were to accept blood money if any of my family member were to be murdered, I will say that it depends on the situation. If it is manslaughter, I can but if it is murder, I cannot. However, I agree that the death penalty should be use like a plea bargain to accept blood money. I realized that the vast majority of victims’ families cannot accept blood money, as they want true justice.

Please see a few of my previous blog posts on Muslims thoughts on blood money:

1. Associate Professor Seyed Hossein Serajzadeh’s article: Islam and Crime

2. Imam Alhaji Abdoulie Fatty’s sermon on capital punishment

3. Muhammad Sadiq Diab’s article: Living on Death Row

4. Tariq A. Al Maeena’s article: Endless debate over death penalty

No comments:

Post a Comment