Mutakalim
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2014
- Messages
- 1,975
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
A debate is going on between majority of Pakistanis and our western educated liberal elite on the issue of Public punishments. After every rape incident, the demand of Public punishments has been raised by majority of Pakistanis. They demand that such criminals should be hanged publicly, to create deterrence against future offenses. Today, this demand was also raised on the floor of Parliament by Parliamentarians associated with all parties, except PPP. Lets discuss this issue, without involving ourselves in petty mudslinging against each other.
As far as Muslims are concerned, the highest law giving authority for them is word of Allah i.e Quran. For them, Quran is the Mezan, the final authority and verdict on all matters. Quran states categorically that:
The woman or man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.
Surah e Noor 2
Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.
Surah e Maida 33
Students of Islamic law are well aware of the fact that Huddod punishments are awarded in public and there is a consensus of opinion between all school of thoughts regarding this matter. I dont think any Muslim can explicitly reject Quranic laws. So lets move forward to arguments of liberals who are opposing it wholeheartedly.
Ironically, the same people who call themselves liberals and who claim themselves to be most vocal advocates of women rights , are arguing against implementation of Public punishments.
According to these liberals, the demand of public hanging is nothing more than a distraction by Mullahs to suppress the real issue. They argue that, Mullahs are frog jumping to the last step of the process, without realizing that problem lies with our inherently corrupt judicial system and lackluster performance of our prosecution system. This argument really have little if anything to do with the main thrust of our argument. The point needs to be heavily understood that we are not against reforming judicial and prosecution system, rather we are suggesting that the intensity of punishment should also be increased along with implementing reforms in Judicial system. These efforts of judicial reforms should go in hand to hand with legislation relating to public punishments. To put it differently, these two approaches will not negate each other, rather they would strengthen the whole process.
Second argument of liberals is related to constitutional hurdles in the implementation of public punishments. Article 14 of Constitution of Pakistan states that:
14 Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.
(1) The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.
On the basis of this article liberals argue that constitution of Pakistan grants right of dignity and respect to every citizen, irrespective of his/her nature of crime. Therefore, public punishments violate this fundamental right. They also quote few decisions of supreme and high Courts in favour of this notion of dignity.
I dont know any argument more absurd than this notion of dignity for a rapist. These creatures lose their dignity and respect when they involve themselves in these heinous crimes. Moreover, these constitutional hurdles can be removed by amending the constitution.
It is just a casual effort on my part to start a serious debate on this issue. I hope that PDF members will share their opinions without involving themselves in usual approach of shooting the messenger instead of message.
As far as Muslims are concerned, the highest law giving authority for them is word of Allah i.e Quran. For them, Quran is the Mezan, the final authority and verdict on all matters. Quran states categorically that:
The woman or man found guilty of sexual intercourse - lash each one of them with a hundred lashes, and do not be taken by pity for them in the religion of Allah, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a group of the believers witness their punishment.
Surah e Noor 2
Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.
Surah e Maida 33
Students of Islamic law are well aware of the fact that Huddod punishments are awarded in public and there is a consensus of opinion between all school of thoughts regarding this matter. I dont think any Muslim can explicitly reject Quranic laws. So lets move forward to arguments of liberals who are opposing it wholeheartedly.
Ironically, the same people who call themselves liberals and who claim themselves to be most vocal advocates of women rights , are arguing against implementation of Public punishments.
According to these liberals, the demand of public hanging is nothing more than a distraction by Mullahs to suppress the real issue. They argue that, Mullahs are frog jumping to the last step of the process, without realizing that problem lies with our inherently corrupt judicial system and lackluster performance of our prosecution system. This argument really have little if anything to do with the main thrust of our argument. The point needs to be heavily understood that we are not against reforming judicial and prosecution system, rather we are suggesting that the intensity of punishment should also be increased along with implementing reforms in Judicial system. These efforts of judicial reforms should go in hand to hand with legislation relating to public punishments. To put it differently, these two approaches will not negate each other, rather they would strengthen the whole process.
Second argument of liberals is related to constitutional hurdles in the implementation of public punishments. Article 14 of Constitution of Pakistan states that:
14 Inviolability of dignity of man, etc.
(1) The dignity of man and, subject to law, the privacy of home, shall be inviolable.
On the basis of this article liberals argue that constitution of Pakistan grants right of dignity and respect to every citizen, irrespective of his/her nature of crime. Therefore, public punishments violate this fundamental right. They also quote few decisions of supreme and high Courts in favour of this notion of dignity.
I dont know any argument more absurd than this notion of dignity for a rapist. These creatures lose their dignity and respect when they involve themselves in these heinous crimes. Moreover, these constitutional hurdles can be removed by amending the constitution.
It is just a casual effort on my part to start a serious debate on this issue. I hope that PDF members will share their opinions without involving themselves in usual approach of shooting the messenger instead of message.
