Qisas and Diyat Laws

Discrimination against women and slaves

Extracts from the page 177 and 178 of the book "Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth Century" By Rudolph Peters:
http://legalportal.am/download/library/p16v8rklpq19vo3pn1vh3ugb1cbe3.pdf

"In classical Shari'a criminal law men and women are treated differently with regard to evidence and bloodmoney. The testimony of a man has twice the strength of that of a woman. Instead of the testimonies of two male witnesses required for conclusive evidence, the testimonies of one man and two women or the testimonies of four women may be used in court. However, with regard to hadd offences and retaliation, the testimonies of female witnesses are not admitted at all. These rules are now included in most recent Shari'a codes. A further rule that puts women in an inferior legal position is the Malikite rule, adopted in the Sudan and Northern Nigeria, that pregnancy of an unmarried woman is regarded as conclusive proof of unlawful sexual intercourse. A final point of gender discrimination with regard to evidence is the way law enforcers deal with women who report rape. In some countries, such a report is regarded as confession to unlawful sexual intercourse. In order not to be punished, the woman must show that she did not give her consent. Moreover, if she names her attacker and cannot establish, according to the strict rules of the Shari'a, that he has had intercourse with her, she is liable to the fixed punishment for defamation (qadhf ).

The second domain in which women are legally discriminated against is the law of homicide and wounding. Under classical Islamic law, the bloodprice of a woman is half that of a man. Most Shari'a penal codes are silent on the issue and specify only the bloodprice of a Muslim man, implying by the use of the words ‘Muslim man’ that the bloodprice for women and non-Muslims is different. The Sudanese Penal Code (both the 1983 and 1991 codes) defines the upper limit of the bloodprice without reference to a Muslim male, which probably implies that no distinction is made between men and women. Only the Iranian code explicitly lays down that a woman’s bloodprice is only half that of a man. Moreover, in Iran the Shiite doctrine is applied that if the killer’s bloodprice is of a higher value than the victim’s, retaliation is conditional on the payment of the difference by the victim’s heirs to the killer’s heirs. Thus, if a woman is killed by a man, her heirs can only demand retaliation if they are willing to pay half the value of the full bloodprice to the heirs of the killer (art. 258 Iranian Penal Code). A final form of gender discrimination is found in article 630 of the same code. This section expressly allows a husband to kill his wife and her lover, if he catches them inflagrante. There is no provision in the Iranian Penal Code granting the wife the same right with regard to her husband."

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=qisas#v=onepage&q=qisas&f=false

Extract from the page 89 of the book "The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan: Sharia in Practice" By Tahir Wasti:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA90#v=onepage&q&f=false

Extract from the page 90 of the book "The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan: Sharia in Practice" By Tahir Wasti:

Discrimination against non-Muslims


http://archive.is/HjC7l 
https://sites.google.com/a/tashayyu.org/wasail/wasail/qisas/qisas-for-murder/chapter-47 
http://www.tashayyu.org/hadiths/wasail/qisas/qisas-for-murder/chapter-47

Qisas in regards to the murder of a non-Muslim by a Muslim 1 ـ محمد بن يعقوب ، عن محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن علي بن الحكم وغيره ، عن أبان بن عثمان ، عن إسماعيل بن الفضل ، قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن دماء المجوس واليهود والنصارى ، هل عليهم وعلى من قتلهم شيء ، إذا غشوا المسلمين وأظهروا العداوة لهم ؟ قال : لا ، إلا أن يكون متعودا لقتلهم ، قال : وسألته عن المسلم هل يقتل بأهل الذمة وأهل الكتاب إذا قتلهم ؟ قال : لا ، إلا أن يكون معتادا لذلك لا يدع قتلهم ، فيقتل وهو صاغر . ورواه الصدوق بإسناده عن علي بن الحكم مثله . 1 – Muhammad b. Ya`qub from Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam and other than him from Aban b. `Uthman from Isma`il b. al-Fadl.  He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام about the bloods of the Zoroastrians and the Jews and the Christians, is there anything upon them and upon whoever kills them, when they cheat the Muslims and show enmity to them?  He said: No, not unless he is in the habit of killing them.  He said: And I asked him about the Muslim, is he killed for the people of dhimma and the people of the book when he has killed them?  He said: No, not unless he is habituated to that, not leaving their killing.  So (if so), he is killed while he is abased. And as-Saduq narrated it by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hakam likewise. 2 ـ وبالإسناد عن يونس ، عن ابن مسكان ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : إذا قتل المسلم يهوديا أو نصرانيا أو مجوسيا فأرادوا أن يقيدوا ردوا فضل دية المسلم وأقادوه . 2 – And by the isnad from Yunus from Ibn Muskan from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: When the Muslim has killed a Jew or a Christian or a Zoroastrian, and they want to retaliate, they render the diyya of the Muslim and retaliate for him. 3 ـ وعنه ، عن زرعة ، عن سماعة ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) في رجل قتل رجلا من أهل الذمة ، فقال : هذا حديث شديد لا يحتمله الناس ولكن يعطي الذمي دية المسلم ثم يقتل به المسلم . ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن يونس ، وكذا الذي قبله ، والاول بإسناده عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن علي بن الحكم ، عن أبان ، وبإسناده عن الحسين بن سعيد ، عن القاسم بن محمد وفضالة ، عن أبان مثله . 3 – And from him from Zur`a from Sama`a from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام regarding a man who killed a man from the people of dhimma. So he said: This hadith is severe, the people do not bear it, however the dhimmi gives the diyya of the Muslim then the Muslim is killed for him. And the Shaykh narrated it by his isnad from Yunus, and thus the one prior to it, and the first by his isnad from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Aban, and by his isnad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from al-Qasim b. Muhammad and Fadala from Aban likewise. 4 ـ وعن عدة من أصحابنا ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن الحسين بن سعيد ، عن فضالة بن أيوب ، عن أبي المغرا ، عن أبي بصير عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : إذا قتل المسلم النصراني فأراد أهل النصراني أن يقتلوه قتلوه ، وأدوا فضل ما بين الديتين . 4 – And from a number of our companions from Ahmad b. Muhammad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from Fadala b. Ayyub from Abu ‘l-Maghra from Abu Basir from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: When the Muslim has killed the Christian, and the family of the Christian wants to kill him, they kill him, and they render the excess of what is between the two diyyas. 5 ـ وعن علي بن إبراهيم ، عن أبيه ، وعن محمد بن يحيى ، عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن ابن محبوب ، عن ابن رئاب ، عن محمد بن قيس ، عن أبي جعفر ( عليه السلام ) قال : لا يقاد مسلم بذمي في القتل ولا في الجراحات ، ولكن يؤخذ من المسلم جنايته للذمي على قدر دية الذمي ثمانمائة درهم . ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن الحسن ابن محبوب ، والذي قبله بإسناده عن الحسين بن سعيد مثله . 5 – And from `Ali b. Ibrahim from his father and from Muhammad b. Yahya from Ahmad b. Muhammad from Ibn Mahbub from Ibn Ri’ab from Muhammad b. Qays from Abu Ja`far عليه السلام.  He said: The Muslim is not retaliated for a dhimmi in killing or in injuries, rather his felony is taken from the Muslim for the dhimmi in proportion to the diyya of the dhimmi, eight hundred dirham. And the Shaykh narrated it by his isnad from Ibn Mahbub, and the one prior to it by his isnad from al-Husayn b. Sa`id likewise. 6 ـ وعن حميد بن زياد ، عن الحسن بن محمد بن سماعة ، عن أحمد بن الحسن الميثمي ، عن أبان ، عن إسماعيل بن الفضل ، قال : سألت أبا عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) عن المسلم هل يقتل بأهل الذمة ؟ قال : لا ، إلا أن يكون معودا لقتلهم فيقتل وهو صاغر . ورواه الشيخ بإسناده عن أحمد بن محمد ، عن علي بن الحكم ، عن أبان ، والحسين بن سعيد ، عن القاسم بن محمد ، وفضالة ، عن أبان . ورواه الصدوق بإسناده عن علي بن الحكم ، عن إسماعيل بن الفضل مثله ، إلا أنه قال : إلا أن يكون معتادا لذلك لا يدع قتلهم . وروى الذي قبله بإسناده عن الحسن بن محبوب ، والذي قبلهما بإسناده عن علي بن الحكم ، عن أبي المغرا مثله . 6 – And from Humayd b. Ziyad from al-Hasan b. Muhammad b. Sama`a from Ahmad b. al-Hasan al-Mithami from Aban from Isma`il b. al-Fadl.  He said: I asked Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام about the Muslim, is he killed for the people of dhimma.  He said: No, not unless he is habituated to killing them, then he is killed while he is abased. And the Shaykh narrated it from Ahmad b. Muhammad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Aban from al-Husayn b. Sa`id from al-Qasim b. Muhammad and Fadala from Aban. And as-Saduq narrated it by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Isma`il b. al-Fadl likewise, except that he said: not unless he is habituated to that, not leaving off their killing. And he narrated the one prior to it by his isnad from al-Hasan b. Mahbub, and the one prior to them both by his isnad from `Ali b. al-Hakam from Abu ‘l-Maghra likewise. 7 ـ محمد بن الحسن بإسناده عن جعفر بن بشير ، عن إسماعيل بن الفضل ، عن أبي عبدالله ( عليه السلام ) قال : قلت له : رجل قتل رجلا من أهل الذمة ، قال : لا يقتل به ، إلا أن يكون متعودا للقتل . 7 – Muhammad b. al-Hasan by his isnad from Ja`far b. Bashir from Isma`il b. al-Fadl from Abu `Abdillah عليه السلام.  He said: I said to him: A man killed a man from the people of dhimma.  He said: He is not killed for him, unless he is habituated to killing.

Extracts from the page 178 and 179 of the book "Crime and Punishment in Islamic Law: Theory and Practice from the Sixteenth Century" By Rudolph Peters
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=7EAsmttzXjcC&pg=PA178&lpg=PA178#v=onepage&q&f=false 
http://legalportal.am/download/library/p16v8rklpq19vo3pn1vh3ugb1cbe3.pdf
"Under classical Islamic criminal law, Muslims and non-Muslims do not always have the same rights. Different treatment exists in the fields of evidence, the law of retaliation and bloodmoney, and with regard to the application of certain fixed penalties. Under classical Islamic law the testimonies of non-Muslim witnesses are not admitted in court. Although the newly enacted codes are silent on this point, it is plausible that in court practice this rule will be followed. The classical schools of jurisprudence differ on the amount of the bloodprice for non-Muslims, but are in agreement that it is lower than that of a Muslim. None of the Shari'a penal codes is explicit on this point. But here the same reasoning applies as that I mentioned above when discussing the bloodprice of women: the codes only mention the bloodprice of Muslim males, from which it can be inferred that the bloodprice of a non-Muslim has a different value. It is plausible that the rules of classical doctrine would be applied, which would theo- retically mean that in non-Hanafite countries (such as Libya or Northern Nigeria) a Muslim cannot be sentenced to death if he kills a non-Muslim. I have, however, no information on whether or not this rule is actually being applied. In Iran, a Muslim who has killed a non-Muslim can be sentenced to death only if the victim’s heirs pay the difference in bloodprices. Another problem exists in Iran with regard to adherents of the Bahai religion, who are not regarded as protected subjects, dhimm ̄ıs, since the Bahai religion is not recognised under Iranian law. If a Muslim kills a Bahai, retaliation is not possible, neither can the victim’s heirs claim bloodmoney. A final issue where non-Muslims are put in an inferior position to Muslims is the law of qadhf (unfounded allegation of unlawful sexual intercourse). Some Shari'a penal codes protect only Muslims against this form of defamation and not non-Muslims (e.g. art. 5 Pakistan, Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of h. add) Ordinance, 1979). Others are silent on this point. In some cases the discrimination between Muslims and non-Muslims works in favour of the latter: the Northern Nigerian Shari ë a penal codes apply only to Muslims and not to non-Muslims. The latter fall under the 1959 Northern Nigerian Penal Code. The result is that the same offence, e.g. theft or unlawful sexual intercourse, incurs a much more severe punishment for Muslims than for non-Muslims. In Iran non-Muslims will only be punished for drinking alcohol if they do so publicly, whereas for Muslims drinking alcohol is always a punishable offence (Iranian Penal Code, art. 174)." 

http://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/punishment-prescribed-certain-sins 
"2806. If a person. who is adult and sane, kills a Muslim intentionally and unjustly, and the person killed is a man or a boy, his guardian may forgive the murderer or kill him. However, if the person killed is an infidel and his murderer is a Muslim, the murderer cannot be killed. And if the person killed is a Muslim woman or girl and though her Muslim murderer can be killed, yet if he is a man, half of the diyah should be given to her guardian and if he is an insane person or a minor, only diyah should be given, and her diyah is obligatory on Aqilah [i.e. the relatives of the killer from father's side]".  

......

2807. And if the person killed is a woman who is a Muslim and free, her diyah in each of the above mentioned things is half of the diyah of a man. And if the person killed is a zimmi infidel his/her diyah is 800 dirhams in the case of a male and, 400 dirhams in the case of a female. And if the person killed is a non-zimmi infidel no diyah is payable. And the diyah of a slave or slave girl who is killed is his/her price, provided it does not exceed the diyah of a free person and even if it is a care of intentional murder the murderer who is a free person cannot be killed for the sake of a slave or slave girl."


http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2006/71421.htm 
2006: "In 2004 the Expediency Council approved appending a note to Article 297 of the 1991 Islamic Punishments Act, authorizing collection of equal "blood money" (diyeh) for the death of Muslims and non-Muslims. All women and Baha'i men were excluded from the equalization provisions of the bill. According to law, Baha'i blood is considered Mobah, meaning it can be spilled with impunity."


Extract from the page 89 and 90 of the book "The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan: Sharia in Practice" By Tahir Wasti:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA89&lpg=PA89&dq=qisas#v=onepage&q=qisas&f=false

https://twitter.com/cybertosser/status/944851748799352832
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA192#v=onepage&q&f=false
Evidence of non-Muslims and women is not acceptable under Qisas & Diyat laws. Two just Muslim males have to be witnesses. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah said even he couldn't fulfill the requirements of 'tazkiya al-shahud'


https://twitter.com/SAMRIReports/status/1082741919896223745
https://archive.org/stream/TahrirAlVasilah/0000-tahrir%20j4-nA4#page/n299/mode/2up
Grand Ayatollah Khomeini: A Muslim shall not be put to death for killing an infidel, unless the Muslim has the habit of killing infidels. (Tahrir Al-Vasilah Vol. 4)



https://www.hrw.org/reports/1997/iran/Iran-04.htm
"If a non-Muslim kills another non-Muslim, qisas applies. However, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim, the law does not require qisas, and does not specify a punishment. Article 2 of the penal code makes clear that the existence of a specified punishment denotes the existence of an offense. Therefore, in the absence of a specified punishment in this instance, the judge may even rule that no offense has taken place in the willful killing of a non-Muslim by a Muslim. Therefore, the penal law applies less value to the life of a non-Muslim as compared to a Muslim and may even permit the murder with impunity of non-Muslims by Muslims."

https://www.essex.ac.uk/hri/documents/HRIU_Research_Paper-IRI_Criminal_Code-Overview.pdf
"Different treatment exists, for example, with regard to the law of retaliation and blood money. If a Muslim kills a Christian, for example, the qisas (retaliation) cannot be requested by the heirs of the victim and they can only ask for diya: 

“Article 299- Qisas shall be delivered only if … the victim is … equal in religion with the perpetrator. 
Note- When the victim is a Muslim, the fact that the murderer is a non-Muslim does not prevent the qisas.” 
 
In addition, before 2003, even the amount of blood money for non-Muslims was a highly controversial issue and different religious scholars had different views in this regard. In 2003, an amendment was made in the Penal Code and the equal blood money for religious minorities was accepted. Accordingly, article 548 of the new Penal Code has provided that: 

“According to the order of the Supreme Leader, the diya (blood money) of the religious minorities which recognized in the Constitution shall be equal to diya of Muslims”. 

However, clearly there is a problem with regard to believers of religions that are not recognized in the Constitution of the IRI. According to Article 13 of the Constitution, only Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Iranians have been recognized as non-Muslim religious minorities of Iran. The believers of the above mentioned religions are described in Islamic sources as Ahl-al-kitāb (who believe in a religion which possesses a revealed scripture). This is while under international human rights law, the term “religious minorities” covers all religions and beliefs held by minority parts of the population. So, the IRI has limited the term “religious minorities” to the three above-mentioned religions and does not recognize the believers of other religions such as Baha’is, Sufis, Mandanis, etc. as religious minorities. It is even worse when it comes to non- believers and atheists and those converted from Islam. As a result, for example, if a Muslim kills a Baha’i, qisas (retaliation) is not possible, neither can the victim’s heirs claim blood money."


http://www.islamic-laws.com/kashifulghita/04.htm
"A Muslim is subject to retaliation only in the case of the murder of another Muslim. Likewise, retaliation shall be taken against the freedman only for the murder of a freedman."


http://www.javedahmadghamidi.com/books/view/qisas-o-diyat-main-muslim-aur-ghair-muslim-main-imtiyaz 
Javed Ahmad Ghamidi's view on discrimination against non-Muslims in Qisas and Diyat laws.



Discrimination against mentally disabled

http://www.hubeali.com/books/Urdu-Books/IlalusSharae/IlalusSharae2of2.pdf
Ilalus Shari by sheikh Saduq, page 439

Discrimination against children

 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?redir_esc=y&id=ujwLunL_rrQC&pg=PA85#v=onepage&q&f=false

 

 

 

Extract from the page 90 of the book "The Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan: Sharia in Practice" By Tahir Wasti:
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=88-XutlkJAQC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=qisas#v=onepage&q=qisas&f=false

http://www.al-islam.org/islamic-laws-ayatullah-abul-qasim-al-khui/punishment-prescribed-certain-sins
"2799. If a child kills his father or mother intentionally, he should be killed, and if a father kills his child intentionally he should pay diyah (blood-money) in accordance with the orders which will be related later and should be beaten as much as the Religious Head may deem fit."


http://www.islamic-laws.com/kashifulghita/04.htm
"There is no retaliating against the father, the grandfather or the great-grandfather, if they murder their son, grandson or great-grandson, only compensation."


http://pointdebasculecanada.ca/two-islamic-texts-stressing-the-immunity-for-honour-killings-an-answer-to-ziad-hashmis-national-post-challenge/

Umdat al-Salik (Sunni). Section o1.2 lists many cases of murder for which the murderer is granted immunity. Case #4 refers specifically to that of a parent who kills his/her child:

“o1.2 The following are not subject to retaliation:

1. A child or insane person, under any circumstances … ;
2. A Muslim for killing a non-Muslim ;
3. A Jewish or Christian subject of the Islamic state for killing an apostate from Islam … ;
4. A father or mother (or their fathers or mothers) for killing their offspring, or offspring’s offspring ;
5. …“

 Ahmad ibn Naqid al-Misri (1302 – 1367), Umdat al-Salik (Reliance of the Traveller), Beltsville (Maryland), Amana Publications, 1994, pp. 583-584

http://pointdebasculecanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/clarification_retaliation.pdf

In the section 2.3 of Appendix II that he added to his book A Clarification of Questions, Ayatollah Khomeini mentions specifically that, in order to be punished, the murderer must not be the slain’s father:

RETALIATION (GHASAS)
2 – Conditions of retaliation

1. Equality in liberty and bondage, and therefore a free will be retaliated vis a vis a free.
2. Equality in religion, therefore Moslems will not be retaliated for infidel, unless a Moslem has a habit of killing infidels.
3. The slayer is not the father of the slain, nor the parental grandfather (apparently).
4. Reason ans wisdom.
5. Puberty.
6. That he religiously does not deserve to be killed, such as when a person is forced to kill in self-defense.

   Ayatollah Khomeini, A Clarification of Questions, Westview Press, Boulder (Colorado), 1984, p. 429

http://ur.rasanews.ir/detail/News/428554/3
 حضرت آيت ‌الله سبحانی نے تاکید کی : اسلام کے مطابق خواتین مغرب ثقافت کے خلاف گھر کی
روٹی و اخراجات کا انتظام کرنے والی نہیں ہے اور شوہر پر ذمہ داری ہے کہ نفقہ کا انتظام کرے اسی وجہ سے اگر خاتون کا قتل ہو جاتا ہے تو خانوادے پر اقتصافی نقصان کم ہوگا اور اسی وجہ سے اسلام کی اقتصادی قانون کے مطابق خواتین کا دیہ مرد کا آدھا ہے