Islam gives freedom to the government of the day to decide on the forms of punishment to mete out for severe crimes, a prominent Islamic jurist explained today in the midst of controversy over a proposal to enforce the hudud provisions of Islamic law in Kelantan.
According to former Perlis mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, Islamic law emphasises compassion and the mention of hudud should not provoke the fear it often does.
However, he added, conditions in Malaysia were not conducive for hudud.
The issue resurfaced recently when PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat, responding to former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s provocation, said that he would want to implement hudud in Kelantan, where he is Menteri Besar.
His statement received the backing of PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim, causing DAP to see red.
Leaders of PAS, PKR and DAP, as partners of the Pakatan Rakyat alliance, will meet tomorrow to discuss the issue.
According to Asri, Islamic law in spirit tends to be more concerned with crimes that disrupt peace and harmony in society than those that affect individuals. Indeed, he added, Islamic law was protective of individual privacy.
“When it comes to the charge of fornication, for instance, there is a greater tendency to release than to punish the accused because the crime involves the privacy of individuals,” he told FMT.
Fornication is one of the handful of crimes for which punishment is prescribed under hudud. The penalty is 100 lashes of the whip. The accuser must provide four credible eye witnesses, failing which he or she will be punished with 80 lashes.
Scientific evidence such as DNA profiles would not be admissible, Asri explained.
Another crime punishable under hudud is theft. The penalty is amputation of a hand. However, according to Asri, Islamic history has shown that this has rarely been carried out because of the demands for proof are again rigorous and extenuating circumstances are always taken into account.
“If someone steals out of poverty, he or she cannot be punished.”
Nevertheless, he added, the Malaysian environment was not conducive for the implementation of hudud.
“It is important to have a conducive environment, or else the objectives of hudud implementation will not be achieved.”
Referring to Nik Aziz’s assurance that hudud would apply only to Muslims, he said: “I don’t understand this. If you implement hudud, you need to implement it for all the people. It is common sense.”
He questioned how Nik Aziz’s brand of hudud would confront crimes committed by pairs or groups that included Muslims and non-Muslims.
http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/2011/09/27/asri-explains-hudud-and-islamic-compassion/
Can’t understand why they are so focused on punishment. In secular punishment just about any authorised person can impose the punishment and anyone authorised may execute the punishment. I can live with that. But in Sharia or Hudud, the least I should be able to expect is that the person imposing the punishment as well as the one executing it first be without sin!!