> Please take a close look at the Sharia laws before you say anything! As it
> has VERY VERY strict rules about witness requirements before anybody's hand
> can be chopped of. Also the person(thief) has to be proven unrealizable.
> Amputation is only the last resort and taken very seriously.
The "VERY VERY strict rules about witness requirements" are just part
of the many horrors of Sharia:
The legal procedure, under Islam, can hardly be called impartial or
fair, for in the matter of witnesses all sorts of injustices emerge.
A non-Muslim may not testify against a Muslim. For example, a Muslim
may rob a non-Muslim in his home with impunity if there are no
witnesses except the non-Muslim himself. The evidence of Muslim
women is admitted only very exceptionally and then only from twice
the number required of men.
On *ery the Koran 24.4 says: "Those that defame honourable women
and cannot produce four witnesses shall be given eighty lashes." Of
course, Muslim jurists will only accept four male witnesses. These
witnesses must declare that they have "seen the parties in the very
act of * conjunction. Once an accusation of * and
*ery has been made, the accuser himself or herself risks
punishment if he or she does not furnish the necessary legal proofs.
Witnesses are in the same situation. If a man were to break into a
woman's dormitory and* half a dozen women, he would risk nothing
since there would be no male witnesses. Indeed the victim of a*
would hesitate before going in front of the law, since she would risk
being condemned herself and have little chance of obtaining justice.
"If the woman's words were sufficient in such cases," explains Judge
Zharoor ul Haq of Pakistan, "then no man would be safe." This
iniquitous situation is truly revolting and yet for Muslim law it is
a way of avoiding social scandal concerning the all-important *
taboo. Women found guilty of * were literally immured, at
first; as the Koran 4.15 says: "Shut them up within their houses till
death release them, or God make some way for them." However this was
later canceled and stoning substituted for *ery and one hundred
lashes for *. When a man is to be stoned to death, he is
taken to some barren place, where he is stoned first by the
witnesses, then the judge, and then the public. When a woman is
stoned, a hole to receive her is dug as deep as her waist-the Prophet
himself seems to have ordered such procedure. It is lawful for a man
to kill his wife and her lover if he catches them in the very act.
In the case where a man suspects his wife of *ery or denies the
legitimacy of the offspring, his testimony is worth that of four men.
Sura 24.6: "If a man accuses his wife but has no witnesses except
himself, he shall swear four times by God that his charge is true,
calling down upon himself the curse of God if he is lying. But if his
wife swears four times by God that his charge is false and calls down
His curse upon herself if it be true, she shall receive no
punishment." Appearances to the contrary, this is not an example of
Koranic justice or equality between the sexes. The woman indeed
escapes being stoned to death but she remains rejected and loses her
right to the dowry and her right to maintenance, whatever the outcome
of the trial. A woman does not have the right to charge her husband
in a similar manner. Finally, for a Muslim marriage to be valid there
must be a multiplicity of witnesses. For Muslim jurists, two men form
a multiplicity but not two or three or a thousand women.
Marc Brett +44 20 8560 3160 WesternGeco
FAX: +44 20 8847 5711 Middlesex TW7 5AA UK
ICBM: TQ 15774 76378 (OSGB)
The Telecom Digest is currently mostly robomoderated. Please mail