Medical student Asma Rani’s murderer ‘pardoned’

[EasyNow]

Pardon by Relative isn't a loophole. Its the Law. A loophole is something someone exploits to counter the Law.

You've demolished your own argument with this. Every country has loopholes - but Pakistan has enshrined in law the right for a criminal to buy his way out of a crime. Wild guess which section of society this benefits most? I don't understand why you would defend such a law - while Pakistanis complain endlessly about elite privileges.

 

[Trailer23]

Such laws wont fall under UN or ICJ jurisdiction. Does not mean we cant criticize such laws.

I'm aware that they don't fall under the UN or ICJ's jurisdiction. I was merely pointing out that you could approach them - if you had a point/case. But in order for that, you'd have to be part of some Human Rights Group.

I suggest you let Muslim Nations run their law the way its intended it to be.

Our religion teaches forgiveness regardless the severity of the crime.

There is no muslim specific law. Some states in India have law which bans cow slaughter or beef consumption. However, killing of humans for any reason in wrong and should be condemned in strictest terms.

You first point out there is No Muslim Specific Law & then point out that some States have a law. I don't care if Punjab has a Law & the South doesn't. Last I checked, they are part of India.

In the US, the Lethal Injection is only practiced in 5 States. But it does exist.

Agreed pardon by relative isnt a loophole. It is a foolish law.

Said the desert to the sand.

I don't understand why you would defend such a law.

I am not defending 'such a law'. I am merely pointing out of its existence on the basis of our religion.

Last I checked, Bangladesh was still considered as Muslim State, right?

Perhaps you need to check the Judicial System of your home nation. That is if you still consider Bangladesh as your home.

 

[EasyNow]

I am not defending 'such a law'. I am merely pointing out of its existence on the basis of our religion.

Last I checked, Bangladesh was still considered as Muslim State, right?

Perhaps you need to check the Judicial System of your home nation. That is if you still consider Bangladesh as your home.

Of course you're defending the law - you're citing religion to justify a law that is obviously impossible to apply fairly in Pakistan. You can't just apply religion in parts only - if you want to have a blood money system then it must go hand in hand with an incorruptible judicial system and total guarantee of security for the victim party.

Only then is it forgiveness - I am surprised you are bringing up that Islam is a religion of forgiveness given the cynical use of the rule in this context

 

[M. Sarmad]

Agreed pardon by relative isnt a loophole. It is a foolish law.

Just because you don't understand the rationale behind a law doesn't make the law "foolish"

Islamic jurisprudence makes a distinction between crimes against other individuals and crimes against the lord (limits set by the lord), Former being compoundable in most cases.

For muslims, forgiving is an act of atonement

"Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself...." (Qur'an 5:45) ... Forgiveness by the relatives of the slain is a concession and a Mercy from the Lord (2:178)

Also, It's interesting to note that you find no issues with the English/Indian laws allowing head of the state/Governor etc to forgive a murderer but are highly critical when the same right is given to the family of the victim in Islamic jurisprudence. Islamophobia ?

Bangladeshi judicial system has many, many problems but even we understand that a blood money rule is wrong.

It's not the law/rule itself that's wrong but the misuse/abuse of the law

 

[TigerOfMysore]

This is the exact reason why murders should not be a pardonable offense, but considered a crime against the state. Otherwise the rich the powerful and the criminal will always get awa

Medical student Asma Rani’s murderer ‘pardoned’
Girl's father denies he acted under duress or took money


SAMAA | Siraj Khan - Posted: Aug 30, 2021 | Last Updated: 6 days ago

Medical student Asma Rani (File)

​

A man convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of medical student Asma Rani has been ‘pardoned’ by her father, SAMAA Digital has learnt.






Rani’s father Ghulam Dastageer says he had faced threats but he decided to pardon the killer only for the sake of Allah’s blessings after consulting with local notables and ulema.


Mujahid Afridi had gunned down Rani on January 27, 2018, in Kohat after she turned down his marriage proposal. The young prodigy had named Mujahid in her last statement recorded on the video.













Dastageer said Mujahid Afridi’s family visited him at his home and implored for pardoning the killer.


“They wronged my daughter but I have decided to pardon the culprit for the sake of Allah’s blessings,” he said.


“I was also receiving threats in connection with the case and I was also told that ‘we are in the government, so you should consent to the settlement’ but I was adamant that I will see Asma’s killer at the gallows,” Dastageer said.


He said after consulting with local notables and ulema he made the decision for the sake of Allah’s blessings and he was thankful to all the people who had supported him in the case.


Mujahid Afridi’s family and the Kohat Police confirmed that a settlement had been concluded.


The police say Dastageer pardoned the death sentence convict Mujahid Afridi at a Jirga, and the formal declaration of the settlement would be announced at the Kohat Tabligi Markaz next Sunday (on September 5).


Meanwhile, Asma Rani’s father has been accused of making the decision under duress or in exchange for money. Dastageer has rejected the claims in a video message.

Who was Asma Rani?



Asma Rani was a 3rd-year MBBS student at the Ayub Medical College Abbottabad.


Rani’s family hails from Lakki Marwat district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, but they lived in Kohat.


The video statement that Rani recorded before she breathed her last went viral and led to the arrest of Mujahid who had fled to Saudi Arabia.


“Mujahid Afridi,” she clearly names the killer after repeating his first name three times.


The video caused outrage in the country.


After the murder, Mujahid Afridi fled to Saudi Arabia, where he was arrested by Interpol at the request of Pakistan. He was extradited in March 2018.


Security concerns caused officials to move the murder trial to Peshawar from Kohat after the initial few proceedings. In June 2021, a Peshawar court sentence Mujahid Afridi to death, acquitting two other accused Shahzeb and Siddiqullah.

گھوٹکی میں فائرنگ سے ایک شخص جاں بحق اور خاتون زخمی

www.samaa.tv

Just because you don't understand the rationale behind a law doesn't make the law "foolish"

Islamic jurisprudence makes a distinction between crimes against other individuals and crimes against the lord (limits set by the lord), Former being compoundable in most cases.

For muslims, forgiving is an act of atonement

"Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth, and wounds equal for equal." But if any one remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an act of atonement for himself...." (Qur'an 5:45) ... Forgiveness is a concession and a Mercy from the Lord (2:178)

Also, It's interesting to note that you find no issues with the English laws allowing head of the state/Governor etc to forgive a murderer but are highly critical when the same right is given to the family of the victim. Islamophobia ?



It's not the law/rule itself that's wrong but the misuse/abuse of the law

Laws that can be misused are bad laws and the framing or writing needs to be stronger so they cannot be misused. Till them they will remain bad laws.

The problem is we take a system of laws from the beduins (tribal) and apply that to modern societies (and non-tribal constructs). It wont work. Allah has given us a brain - use it for His sake. The primary purpose for such laws in those days was two fold. Delegation of legal structure down to the local level, so judgement is dispensed with quicker. And second in order to reduce inter-tribal conflict, this "forgiveness" clause was allowed, so there can be an end to tribal conflict. The State in those days was weak and given distances this was a prudent approach. It was wrong then but given the operational limitations of a sovereign it was perhaps the practical approach.

That rule should not apply in modern times and the state needs to be the single sovereign over such elements. The sovereign must protect each subject for their natural rights of life and liberty, and this cannot be subverted by a tribal archaic system, or a surviving family member.

It is ironic that some "Maulvis" will argue that in those days things were done this way and that way, so we must do it that way. But those same maulvis will drive around in AC'd Land Cruisers and live modern lives with modern amenities. JI leader Maududi was a perfect example, who was fire and brimstone for other people's wives and daughters, but when it came to his own wife and daughter, well the rules were a bit relaxed to say the least.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Laws that can be misused are bad laws and the framing or writing needs to be stronger so they cannot be misused. Till them they will remain bad laws.

The problem is we take a system of laws from the beduins (tribal) and apply that to modern societies (and non-tribal constructs). It wont work. Allah has given us a brain - use it for His sake. The primary purpose for such laws in those days was two fold. Delegation of legal structure down to the local level, so judgement is dispensed with quicker. And second in order to reduce inter-tribal conflict, this "forgiveness" clause was allowed, so there can be an end to tribal conflict. The State in those days was weak and given distances this was a prudent approach. It was wrong then but given the operational limitations of a sovereign it was perhaps the practical approach.

That rule should not apply in modern times and the state needs to be the single sovereign over such elements. The sovereign must protect each subject for their natural rights of life and liberty, and this cannot be subverted by a tribal archaic system, or a surviving family member.

It is ironic that some "Maulvis" will argue that in those days things were done this way and that way, so we must do it that way. But those same maulvis will drive around in AC'd Land Cruisers and live modern lives with modern amenities. JI leader Maududi was a perfect example, who was fire and brimstone for other people's wives and daughters, but when it came to his own wife and daughter, well the rules were a bit relaxed to say the least.

Death penalty for murder is not the preferred punishment in Islamic law, but an exception. The system of victim forgiveness and restitution was established by Islam as a means of achieving justice without losing another life. There is legal consensus among Muslim jurists that forgiveness is better than the application of qisas/retribution. Nothing medieval or tribal about this law, nor does what you are calling "tribal archaic system" take away the right of life and liberty from anyone.


As you are talking about the so-called 'modern laws' here, Qisas in Islamic law in fact closely reflects international standards on the application of the death penalty.

UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states:

In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime [Article 6 (2)]

and

Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases. [Article 6 (4)]

 

[TigerOfMysore]

Death penalty for murder is not the preferred punishment in Islamic law, but an exception. The system of victim forgiveness and restitution was established by Islam as a means of achieving justice without losing another life. There is legal consensus among Muslim jurists that forgiveness is better than the application of qisas/retribution. Nothing medieval or tribal about this law, nor does what you are calling "tribal archaic system" take away the right of life and liberty from anyone.


As you are talking about the so-called 'modern laws' here, Qisas in Islamic law in fact closely reflects international standards on the application of the death penalty.

UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states:

In countries which have not abolished the death penalty, sentence of death may be imposed only for the most serious crimes in accordance with the law in force at the time of the commission of the crime [Article 6 (2)]

and

Anyone sentenced to death shall have the right to seek pardon or commutation of the sentence. Amnesty, pardon or commutation of the sentence of death may be granted in all cases. [Article 6 (4)]

Yaar your argument is predicated on a premise that the application of law in our society is fairly distributed. When you compare Qisas's application to some modern Northern European construct, you fail to distinguish that in European societies law's application is generally speaking fair. In our society only the State is sometime strong enough to take on and fight for the rights of impacted. Also in European societies you do not have forgiveness. In the US a murder charge depending on the State will carry a life in prison and or death penalty. In addition to that the civil liability means money in restitution as well.

Also murder in almost any society is considered a serious crime justifying a death penalty.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Yaar your argument is predicated on a premise that the application of law in our society is fairly distributed. When you compare Qisas's application to some modern Northern European construct, you fail to distinguish that in European societies law's application is generally speaking fair. In our society only the State is sometime strong enough to take on and fight for the rights of impacted. Also in European societies you do not have forgiveness. In the US a murder charge depending on the State will carry a life in prison and or death penalty. In addition to that the civil liability means money in restitution as well.

Also murder in almost any society is considered a serious crime justifying a death penalty.

Yes, that exactly is my point. It's not the law itself that's problematic but its misuse/implementation. It's not this law itself that is shitty and foolish, as one of the Indian members here said, but the poor implementation of the law in a society like ours.

The strongest argument against this law is that it favours the rich

However, Islamic jurisprudence permits the use of Zakat as a means to pay blood-money on behalf of those murderers who can not afford to pay on their own. Again, it's the partial implementation of the law that is problematic. Pakistan government collects billions in the name of Zakat every year and it's the responsibility of the government to compensate the relatives of the victims by paying them the "remaining" amount if they are willing to take blood-money, after taking whatever property/assets the murderer owns.

Now coming to this specific case, even If the victim’s family takes diyyat (blood-money) or forgives the murderer, an alternative discretionary (ta‘zir) punishment can be enforced in form of imprisonment by the court of law, as we saw in Shahrukh Jaoti's case. This is something allowed in Islamic law as well as the Pakistan Penal Code.

 

[Goritoes]

Allah will not forgive, the rapists would've been lucky if they get punished in this world but they have no idea what's coming to them will last for a long long time, and it will be much more brutal than anyone in this world can do...

 

[magra]

I believe in your positive law, PM can pardon as well

In India, it is the President or Governor who can commute death sentence to life. I dont think they can outright pardon a convict.

Hei dont say it as foolish law, the fool is the one who worship many Gods like Hindus

You are attacking Hinduism without understanding it. In any case, this attack is uncalled for. I am not attacking Islam here.

This pardon is only few among many cases where the murders get punishment. Any way in Islam, the punishment for murder is very lethal, in India I believe it will be just 15 years in prison

In India too, we have death penalty but only in rarest of rare cases. Life sentence is maximum 14 years yes.

Yes, that exactly is my point. It's not the law itself that's problematic but its misuse/implementation. It's not this law itself that is shitty and foolish, as one of the Indian members here said, but the poor implementation of the law in a society like ours.

The strongest argument against this law is that it favours the rich

However, Islamic jurisprudence permits the use of Zakat as a means to pay blood-money on behalf of those murderers who can not afford to pay on their own. Again, it's the partial implementation of the law that is problematic. Pakistan government collects billions in the name of Zakat every year and it's the responsibility of the government to compensate the relatives of the victims by paying them the "remaining" amount if they are willing to take blood-money, after taking whatever property/assets the murderer owns.

Now coming to this specific case, even If the victim’s family takes diyyat (blood-money) or forgives the murderer, an alternative discretionary (ta‘zir) punishment can be enforced in form of imprisonment by the court of law, as we saw in Shahrukh Jaoti's case. This is something allowed in Islamic law as well as the Pakistan Penal Code.

Paying money to victim's family should be part of remorse if the convict feels remorse. It should not be part of a deal to escape punishment.
Else if I am a billionaire and I have some grudge on 10 people and l know that blood money would be 1 million each. I will line up the money and start killing those 10 people and still remain with 990 million.

 

[magra]

You first point out there is No Muslim Specific Law & then point out that some States have a law. I don't care if Punjab has a Law & the South doesn't. Last I checked, they are part of India.

Cow slaughter or beef ban law is irrespective of religion. Does not matter if a Hindu or Muslim or Christian violates it, there is same punishment in the law. Hence I said it is not a muslim specific law.

 

[pakpride00090]

In India, it is the President or Governor who can commute death sentence to life. I dont think they can outright pardon a convict.


You are attacking Hinduism without understanding it. In any case, this attack is uncalled for. I am not attacking Islam here.


In India too, we have death penalty but only in rarest of rare cases. Life sentence is maximum 14 years yes.

Because all cultures are not equal.

Honor killings are rampant among Pashtun , Baloch and Sindhi communities. Less among Punjabis relatively and almost non-existent among urdu speaking localities.

People might call me racist but the roots lies among the culture of Pakistani societies. Honour killing in Pakistan - Wikipedia .. You can go through this article and check their last names. Would tell you the story but itself.

 

[magra]

Also, It's interesting to note that you find no issues with the English/Indian laws allowing head of the state/Governor etc to forgive a murderer but are highly critical when the same right is given to the family of the victim in Islamic jurisprudence. Islamophobia ?

In India, head of state can only commute death sentence to life imprisonment. Cannot free the convict.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Paying money to victim's family should be part of remorse if the convict feels remorse. It should not be part of a deal to escape punishment.
Else if I am a billionaire and I have some grudge on 10 people and l know that blood money would be 1 million each. I will line up the money and start killing those 10 people and still remain with 990 million.

It doesn't work that way. Pakistan Penal Code follows the Quranic principle of Fasad Fil Arz (corruption on earth) and there is no forgiveness/clemency for repeat offenders or those who commit crimes in brutal manner, EVEN if the relatives of the victim have forgiven him.

PPC:
311. Ta'zir after waiver or compounding of right of qisas in qatl-i-amd.--Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 309 or Section 310 [where all the walis do not waive or compound the right of qisas or [if] the principle of fasad-fil-arz [is attracted] the Court may, [****] having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, punish an offender against whom the right of qisas has been waived or compounded with [death or imprisonment for life, or] imprisonment of either description for a term-which may extend to [fourteen] years [but shall not be less than ten years] as ta'zir:

[Provided that if the offence has been committed in the name or on the pretext of honour; the imprisonment shall not be less than ten years.]

[Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, the expression fasad-fil-arz shall include the past conduct of the offender or whether he has any previous convictions, or the brutal or shocking manner in which the offence has been committed which is outrageous to the public conscience [or the offence relates to honour crime], or if the offender is considered a potential danger to the community, [or if the offence has been committed in the name or on the pretext of honour.]

In India, head of state can only commute death sentence to life imprisonment. Cannot free the convict.

That's not true. The President can pardon and free any convict.

And in our laws, the relatives of the victim can not FREE the convict, they can only forgive him. It's at court's discretion to set him free or imprison him

 

[magra]

It doesn't work that way. Pakistan Penal Code follows the Quranic principle of Fasad Fil Arz and there is no forgiveness/clemency for repeat offenders or those who commit crimes in brutal manner, EVEN if the relatives of the victim have forgiven him.

PPC:
311. Ta'zir after waiver or compounding of right of qisas in qatl-i-amd.--Notwithstanding anything contained in Section 309 or Section 310 [where all the walis do not waive or compound the right of qisas or [if] the principle of fasad-fil-arz [is attracted] the Court may, [****] having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, punish an offender against whom the right of qisas has been waived or compounded with [death or imprisonment for life, or] imprisonment of either description for a term-which may extend to [fourteen] years [but shall not be less than ten years] as ta'zir:

[Provided that if the offence has been committed in the name or on the pretext of honour; the imprisonment shall not be less than ten years.]

[Explanation.--For the purpose of this section, the expression fasad-fil-arz shall include the past conduct of the offender or whether he has any previous convictions, or the brutal or shocking manner in which the offence has been committed which is outrageous to the public conscience [or the offence relates to honour crime], or if the offender is considered a potential danger to the community, [or if the offence has been committed in the name or on the pretext of honour.]


In our laws, the relatives of the victim can not FREE the convict, they can only forgive him. It's at court's discretion to set him free or imprison him

So under Pakistani law, I can escape with one planned murder (non-brutal, eg. single shot to the head) if I can afford it, right?