Volume 18, Issue 4 (2014)
CLR 2014, 18(4): 123-147 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Nobahar R . From Cancellation of Hadd (Prescribed Punishment) to Penal Abolinishism. CLR 2014; 18 (4) :123-147
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-2-en.html
URL: http://clr.modares.ac.ir/article-20-2-en.html
Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (9335 Views)
Cancellation of Hadd (prescribed punishment) is prohibited in some Islamic narrations. These narrations have often been interpreted and construed as referring to Hodoud as opposed to Tazira’t and their inflexible implementation. According to such an inflexible reading of the texts, Hodoud would not be flexible enough to cover all the necessary expediencies, and would not be compatible with the requirements of different circumstances and conditions.
By critically analyzing the content of these narrations, this article comes to the conclusion that they are not specifically related to Hodoud. Rather, they are talking about punishment, in general, and that any unjustified ignorance and abolitionist approach to the punishment is not acceptable: be the punishment Had or Ta’zir. So the main objective of these narrations is not to emphasize rigidity, inflexibility, and unreasonable seriousness in Hodoud in their idiomatic sense; rather they are emphasizing the certainty of punishments in general. Also the article criticizes some rules inferred from the narrations.
*Corresponding author’s e-mail: r-nobahar@sbu.ac.ir
*Corresponding author’s e-mail: r-nobahar@sbu.ac.ir
Received: 2014/04/29 | Accepted: 2015/01/4 | Published: 2015/03/19
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |