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.
Source: http://www.thenational.ae/news/uae-news/child-killer-is-executed-by-firing-squad?pageCount=0
 |
| 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