|  Hudud 
                        FAQ
 
 Q1: 
                        What is “Hudud Law”?   The 
                        actual term is the Islamic Penal Code System or in Arabic 
                        called Jinayah. Hudud fall under the Jinayah or in other 
                        words it is a part of Jinayah. Jinayah is consist of several 
                        parts; Hudud (the mandatory punishment), Qisas (the reciprocate 
                        punishment) and Takzir (any other was not covered by Hudud 
                        and Qisas). The offenses listed under hudud are: 1) 
                        Theft (Sariqah) 2) Robbery (Hirabah) 3) Fornication (Zina) 
                        4)Adultery (Zina Ghiru Muhsan) 5) Apostacy (Murtad) 6) 
                        False accusation of acts of indecency on a man or woman 
                        (Qazaf) 7) Rebellion against a legitimate government without 
                        any strong justification (Bughah). In simpler terms and 
                        modern terms, the Hudud is list of offenses that will 
                        invoke mandatory punishment.   Q2: 
                        Why is Hudud law so archaic and medieval in nature? Isn't 
                        stoning a person to death considered as medieval?   The 
                        Islamic Penal Code and Hudud is not archaic or medieval. 
                        On the other hand, one is correct to say that it is OLD. 
                        The punishment in hudud is in fact as old as the crime 
                        that it is prescribed to.   One 
                        has to admit that crimes like fornication, adultery, homosexuality, 
                        theft, robbery and the rest are not crimes of MODERN and 
                        CONTEMPORARY origins as opposed to crimes like running 
                        a red light or speeding.   Q3: 
                        The implementation of Hudud laws is not suitable for this 
                        day and age    1) 
                        Q3 is asked in this day and age due to the rehabilitation 
                        practice for crime offenders. In other words the prevalent 
                        and current doctrine for crime-control practice throughout 
                        the whole world is REHABILITATIVE in nature.    The 
                        Islamic Penal Code uses a completely different philosophy 
                        in which it emphasizes on PREVENTION rather then REHABILITATION.   The 
                        measure of success in Islamic Crime control approach depends 
                        on the reduction of crime in a society or community. In 
                        other words, the lower the crime rate the more successful 
                        we are at controlling crime.   The 
                        current practice of rehabilitation relies heavily on how 
                        many crime offenders are being brought back to the right 
                        path while they are put in jail at the expense of the 
                        public.   2) 
                        When hudud was introduced to the general public, naturally 
                        it invites a lot of surprises from the public considering 
                        that we have been exposed to one doctrine of crime control 
                        all this while.    3) 
                        Also, justice transcends the boundary of time and therefore 
                        is enshrined so in hudud. Who is to say what fits and 
                        what does not fit in these day and age.    Q4: 
                        There is sufficient civil and criminal legislation in 
                        the current Malaysian laws that covers the crimes mentioned 
                        in the Terengganu Hudud Laws   1) 
                        Unfortunately, acts like fornication, adultery, intoxication, 
                        accusation of fornication/adultery are not acts deemed 
                        as a crime under the current Malaysian Penal Code. Therefore, 
                        there is no sufficient provisions according to Islam, 
                        governing the law in the Malaysian Penal Code Q5:The Pakistan experience shows that the law is cruel 
                        and unjust to women especially. The case of Zafran Bibi 
                        is an example of injustice of the hudud law in Pakistan.
 1) 
                        The case of Zafran Bibi was quoted in the statement. By 
                        referring to a report by Guardian at 
                        http://www.observer.co.uk/worldview/story/0,11581,714166,00.html 
                        , here are a few interesting details to be highlighted: ź 
                        Zafran Bibi was sentenced to stoning for the fact that 
                        she had named at first Akmal Khan, a villager involved 
                        in a long-running dispute with her family, her neighbor, 
                        as her rapist. She then changed her testimony by naming 
                        her brother in-law, Jamal, 15 years old, as the rapist. ź 
                        The fact that the alleged rapist was a 15 year old boy 
                         ź 
                        The fact that her claim as being raped cannot be taken 
                        by the court as she has perjure herself and thus destroy 
                        every bit of credibility left in her ź 
                        The fact that she tried to incriminate an innocent man ź 
                        The fact that her lawyers were stunned shows that such 
                        a conviction was not common. ź 
                        The fact that there exist no medical evidence proving 
                        her claim of rape.   2) 
                        The claim that Zafran Bibi was convicted due to her accusation 
                        of rape which constitutes a confession of the crime of 
                        zina. If one were to examine the full details of the case 
                        one can deduce that the conviction was due to the fact 
                        that : ź 
                        The pregnancy was actually the main proof of conviction 
                        being that Zafran was pregnant while her husband was in 
                        jail.  ź 
                        Her accusation of rape was taken into account due to the 
                        fact that she CHANGED her testimony and thus perjures 
                        herself in the process. If there was no perjury then her 
                        testimony might hold some weight in the case. Her accusation 
                        of rape was then deemed as a form of confession. According 
                        to the prosecutor: “'She 
                        made herself guilty in that statement when she clearly 
                        admits she had committed zina [adultery] with her brother-in-law,' 
                        said Kurshid Anwar, a prosecutor in the case. 'There was 
                        no mark of violence on her body. It was the right decision 
                        as long as the law exists.' “ A) 
                        Zafran tried to incriminate an innocent man. This actually 
                        is a proof that necessitates Section 9 of the Terengganu 
                        Hudud Bill that protects men from being wrongfully accused. 3) 
                        The case of Zafran also points out that the so call 4 
                        witnesses was not taken into consideration when it comes 
                        to rape under hudud. This is because in the judgement 
                        written by Judge Anwar Ali Khan, no reference was made 
                        to the fact that there exist no 4 witnesses in this case. 
                        Furthermore, the case is expected to be overturned by 
                        the Federal Syariah Court  4) 
                        There are other cases in Pakistan of similar type was 
                        thrown out by the courts due to strong suspicions that 
                        sexual acts occurred in a consenting manner. Yet it was 
                        never referred to skeptics of the Hudud law. 5) 
                        The Terengganu Syariah bill has dealt with the issue of 
                        rape accordingly which has led to the Amendments to Section 
                        9 of the draft. So the Pakistan experience cannot be equated 
                        with Terengganu. 6) 
                        The fact that the skeptics needed to quote the Zafran 
                        Bibi’s case out of context shows that there exists little 
                        or no evidence proving the injustice of hudud laws in 
                        Pakistan. This is in spite of repeated unsubstantiated 
                        claims made by bodies such as Human Rights Commission 
                        of Pakistan. Q6: 
                        Implementation of Hudud does not guarantee free from crime 
                        society    A 
                        simple comparison between Saudi Arabia and the State Of 
                        New York will show that the State of New York has recorded 
                        and will always continue to record a much higher rate 
                        of crime compared to Saudi Arabia at any given time for 
                        any given period.    In 
                        a statement released by the US Justice Department and 
                        reported by Reuters on 26 August 2002 says that: "The number of Americans in jail or under supervision 
                        by authorities as a result of crimes grew by 2.3 percent 
                        by year-end 2001 to almost 6.6 million Americans, or one 
                        in every 32 adults, the government said on Sunday".
   Q7: 
                        Hudud punishment is harsh and inhumane which contradicts 
                        human rights   1) 
                        The Principles of Justice in any Jurisprudence text can 
                        be roughly summarized in 5 pillars: A) 
                        A law recognized by the people  B) 
                        Public Prosecution C) 
                        Open hearing and rights to council D) 
                        Independence Judiciary E) 
                        Rights to Appeal   The 
                        Hudud not only satisfies these 5 pillars but also exceeds 
                        them by any standard. Therefore how can Hudud be contradictory 
                        to Human Rights?   2) 
                        While it's true that the punishment may seem a bit harsher 
                        then that of Penal Code, but the Standard of Proof in 
                        Hudud is much higher then the one used in Penal Code. 
                        In other words, to get a conviction under Hudud is not 
                        a simple as the proof needed to convict someone is of 
                        a higher standard then that of the Malaysian Penal Code.   3) 
                        In Hudud, convictions is done BEYOND ANY SHADOW OF DOUBT 
                        while in the Penal code convictions can be achieved if 
                        the case if only proven Beyond Any Reasonable Doubt.   4) 
                        From the statement above, it's clear that with the rising 
                        of harshness of Hudud punishment, the Standard of Evidence 
                        that is needed to convict someone under hudud also increases.   Comparison For 
                        instance, in the Penal Code, a liar's testimony in court 
                        can be accepted by the judge as evidence while in hudud 
                        cases a liars testimony is totally rejected and will not 
                        be accepted in any cases. The comparison is as follow:   Penal 
                        Code In 
                        the cases Khoon Chye Hin vs Public Prosecutor and Gulwant 
                        Singh v Abdul Khalid, the judge observed that even though 
                        the witness had been proven to be a liar on one of two 
                        points, it was wrong to reject whole of his evidence although 
                        it is the duty of the judge to treat the witness with 
                        caution. However, it would not be enough to reject the 
                        witness altogether   (Nathan, 
                        A Practical Approach to Evidence, p225)   Islamic 
                        Penal Code The 
                        late Justice Hamoodur Rahman former Chief Justice of Pakistan 
                        who was also the Chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, 
                        states that:   “ 
                        A person who gives false testimony should be declared 
                        to be incompetent to give evidence in any other case and 
                        a register should be maintained of such witnesses” (Rahman, 
                        “Some Aspect Of Islamic Law Of Evidence”, in Essays on 
                        Islam, p229)   Q8: Case Studies:
   1) 
                        What if a prostitute was arrested for fornication or adultery 
                        under hudud. The reason for her action is that she relies 
                        on prostitution to provide for her and her family as she 
                        is living in poverty? Answer: 
                        She will not get the hudud punishment and instead the 
                        government agencies that is supposed to support her will 
                        held responsible.   2) 
                        What if a woman who converted to Islam due to marriage 
                        and after that gets a divorce while during the marriage 
                        the husband neglected her education on Islam and left 
                        her ignorant and uninformed enough about Islam to embraced 
                        it for the rest of her life. Should she wants to remarry 
                        and decides to leave her religion, will she be subjected 
                        to the death penalty under hudud? Answer: 
                        NO, considering that her conversion to Islam was not entirely 
                        by her free will out of a well informed decision. There 
                        are credible doubts about he conversion in Islam whether 
                        it was due to her deep understanding or was it due to 
                        mere feelings without any self conviction for converting. 
                        In fact, her husband can be punish by the court under 
                        takzeer.   3) 
                        If somebody is caught stealing for food or out of desperation 
                        or dire need for money. Will his hand be chopped off? Answer: 
                        NO, because the chopping of hands punishment does not 
                        apply to those who steal out of hunger or dire needs, 
                        a wife stealing from her husband for sustenance, stealing 
                        of public property, stealing of articles that is small 
                        in quantity and many more.   4) 
                        When a woman is accused under hudud for fornication or 
                        adultery and she is pregnant out of wed lock, is her claim 
                        of rape enough to justify a doubt in her case Answer: 
                        YES, a mere claim of rape is sufficient to constitute 
                        a doubt in a case provided that the women has never been 
                        proven as a liar and has an unquestionable background.   Q9: 
                        Does hudud law destroys personal freedom in which there 
                        will be a massive movement towards enforcing the law even 
                        within the four walls of your home?   It 
                        is actually the opposite. Spying on individuals to find 
                        faults that can lead to hudud convictions is PROHIBITED 
                        in Islam. Should there be an enforcement unit on hudud, 
                        they are not allowed to spy or send undercover agents 
                        to extract evidence that can be used against an individual 
                        or a group.   The 
                        practice is shown by Prophet Muhammad himself when he 
                        deliberately ignored confessions of a hudud offender the 
                        first time he hears the confession and try his best not 
                        to allow the offender to confess. To spy on an individual 
                        is exactly the opposite of what the Prophet had done.   Q10: 
                        Women are prohibited to become witnesses in Hudud and 
                        Qisas cases except in certain instances. This constitutes 
                        exclusion of women from the process of justice thus denoting 
                        them as being unreliable, untrustworthy, and incapable 
                        of being witnesses 1) 
                        In fact, a woman IS allowed to testify Hudud cases. The 
                        difference is that their testimony will not be sufficient 
                        to get a hudud conviction. If that is the case, then the 
                        testimony will be sufficient for a At Takzir conviction. 2) 
                        I’ve heard the response made by MB of Terengganu on this 
                        issue and he clearly state that the rule is to lift the 
                        burden of being a witness to women as Islam views the 
                        act of witnessing as responsibility and not a form of 
                        privilege. A witness will be reponsible for one's testimony 
                        until the Day of Judgment.   3) To quote from the Pakistan’s experience, Justice Tanzilur 
                        Rahman says:
 “Certainly, 
                        neither any petition has so far been made before the court 
                        nor any objection has been taken in any appeal that the 
                        exclusion of evidence of women and that of non-muslims 
                        under the Hudud Ordinance for the offense liable to hadd 
                        punishment was AGAINST THE INJUNCTIONS OF ISLAM. The Federal 
                        Syariah court as well did not find anything wrong with 
                        these provisions” (Rahman, “Some aspects of the Islamic 
                        Law Of Evidence”, Lahore, Islamic Publication (PVT) Limited, 
                        1988, pg 235)   Q11: 
                        Women in countries implementing Hudud laws are victimized 
                        through Qazaf provisions combined with the acceptance 
                        of pregnancy-out-of-wed-lock evidence. This will specifically 
                        victimized rape victims and let the rapists go free.   1) 
                        As the case of Zafran Bibi, often quoted by Hudud skeptics, 
                        shows that the need for 4 witnesses is unnecessary for 
                        rape cases.   2) 
                        To date, no rape victims have ever been subjected to Hudud 
                        punishment. The best that Hudud skeptics can come up with 
                        are cases which in the end ended up with total dismissal 
                        of the cases and the accused are released from custody.   3) 
                        All of the so called "evidences" comes from 
                        basically two states: Nigeria and Pakistan. All of which 
                        have a relatively little experience in the implementation 
                        of Jinayah. Countries with a long experience of implementation 
                        are not mentioned in their list i.e. Saudi Arabia. Isn’t 
                        this strange    4) 
                        In spite of this, no credible cases of mistreatment of 
                        women in both Nigeria and Pakistan can be quoted to date. 
                        All there is just cases like misquoted cases like Zafran 
                        Bibi mentioned above.   Q12: 
                        In the context of Malaysian Democracy, if the Malaysian 
                        community decides not to accept the law, will the Terengganu 
                        government push forward it’s implementation?   1) 
                        The implementation Hudud on muslims was contained in PAS’es 
                        Terengganu State manifesto before the 1999 elections. 
                        When PAS was voted into power in 1999 implementing it 
                        is merely a fulfillment of it's election promises.   Q13: 
                        Non-Muslims cannot be witnesses in the criminal cases 
                        listed under Hudud seems grossly unfair. The underlying 
                        assumption that non-Muslims are somehow ‘lower’ than Muslims 
                        implies that non-Muslims can be treated as second-class 
                        citizens.   1) 
                        Non Muslims are allowed to testify in Hudud cases. THe 
                        only difference is that their testimony will not be sufficient 
                        for a hudud conviction and will only lead to a Takzir 
                        conviction   2) 
                        However, in cases where there is an absence of any muslim 
                        witnesses, the testimony of a non muslim will be accpeted 
                        for a hudud conviction with two conditions:   A) 
                        He/She has never been proven to be a liar B) 
                        He/She is a believer of a religion and practices his/her 
                        religion.   3) 
                        The religion of a witness is also not an alien concept 
                        to the English law as well. In the 17th century, the religion 
                        of a witness is placed with great emphasis and excluded 
                        the evidence of non-Christians and atheists because they 
                        did not believe in God, and they were therefore regarded 
                        as incompetent to be witness. (M.N. Howard, Phipson On 
                        Evidence, 14th Ed. Phara, 9-06. See also, Cross, Cross 
                        on Evidence, 7th ed., p2002)   A- 
                        In the case of Bowmen v Secular Society Limited (1917) 
                        Appeal case 406, Lord Summer 
                        said:   “ 
                        ours is and always has been a Christian state. The English 
                        family is built on  Christian 
                        ideas, and if the national religion is not Christian there 
                        is none. English law 
                        may be called a Christian law, but we apply many of its 
                        rules and most of it’s principles 
                        with equally good government, in heathen communities and 
                        it’s sections, 
                        even in courts of conscience they are material and not 
                        spiritual” (Abdul 
                        Malik Bappa Muhammad, Supremacy of Islamic Law, p.68.)   B- 
                        Furthermore, Justice Jeremy Bentham has said that it is 
                        good enough if the witness believes 
                        in some kind of divine punishment, although it need not 
                        be as bad as hell-fire (J.R., 
                        Spencer & RH, Flin, The Evidence of Children:The Law 
                        and the Psychology,  London:Blackstone 
                        Press, p 49).    C- 
                        The English Law of Evidence on this particular matter 
                        clearly provides that a witness 
                        should take an oath in the manner of appropriate to his 
                        or her religious faith. (Phipson 
                        on Evidence, p.158)   4) 
                        It is in fact that the Islamic Penal Code is not alone 
                        in using the religion quality for a witness as it has 
                        been used before and even now in the western world.   5) 
                        In addition, the issue of non muslims becoming second 
                        class is non existence considering that it is the choice 
                        of the Non-Muslims themselves not to be governed by the 
                        law and they disqualify their rights to become witnesses 
                        since they chose to disqualify themselves.   Q14: 
                        Does the hudud law covers non muslims as well?   No 
                        and it is stated clearly in the recently passed Terengganu 
                        Syariah Enactment II   Q15: 
                        The fact that there was ambivalence showed by the Terengganu 
                        PAS leaders towards the applicability of hudud on non-Muslims 
                        is also disturbing. Assurances that non-Muslims would 
                        not be judged under hudud were mixed together with statements 
                        saying that non-Muslims would inevitably want to be included 
                        in a hudud justice system because of its inherent fairness.   1) 
                        What was actually said was that non muslims will eventually 
                        covered under the “Hudud” law by their own choice upon 
                        seeing the effectiveness and the goodness of the law.   2) 
                        The Terengganu State government is very clear on this 
                        and adamant too.   Q16: 
                        Muslim apostates will be killed also sits very uneasily 
                        with the Constitutional Provisions that there is freedom 
                        of religion in Malaysia.    1) 
                        Death penalty to apostates is akin to punishment of treason 
                        for most countries in the world. The default punishment 
                        for treason even in democracies like USA and Britain is 
                        always death. Apostasy is treason against GOD and it is 
                        of a higher level of treason then that of treason against 
                        your country. The logic is there. 2) The death penalty to apostates will actually not be 
                        contradictory to the Constitution of Malaysia because 
                        in the same Constitution there contain the provision of 
                        freedom of religion. The death penalty is actually part 
                        of a religious law which it’s practices is protected by 
                        the Constitution. In addition, the Constitution too stipulates 
                        that Islam is the official religion.
   Q17: 
                        What is the weight of circumstantial evidence and expert 
                        opinion in hudud law?   1) 
                        Circumstantial evidence is sufficient to provide doubt 
                        in favor of the accused in a hudud case, such that a person 
                        under trial for a hudud case can be freed on doubts provided 
                        by circumstantial evidence. For instance, a a fingerprint 
                        search at a crime scene can prove that an accused was 
                        never at the crime scene at all and can therefore be freed 
                        on hudud charges   2) 
                        In Islamic evidence law, circumstantial evidence (i.e. 
                        DNA testing, carbon dating, fingerprint testing, blood 
                        analysis, other chemical tests etc) and expert opinion 
                        ARE taken into consideration only for cases involving 
                        TAKZEER should there be no other evidence available.   3) 
                        Circumstantial evidence will NOT be SUFFICIENT to get 
                        a CONVICTION in hudud cases. It does, however, serve as 
                        a corroborative to the conclusive evidence needed to prove 
                        a hudud case.   4) 
                        The Arabic or technical term for Circumstantial evidence 
                        in Islamic Evidence law is Al Qarinah. Q18: Is Hudud gender bias?.
   Hudud 
                        is NOT gender bias in the sense that none of the offenses 
                        and punishment under hudud are dedicated for a certain 
                        gender. All of it's punishment are meant for ALL GENDER. 
   |