Death Penalty In Classical Islamic Jurisprudence Hanafi Maliki And Shafi And Hanbali Views

Abstract

Capital punishment is the foundation of the classical school of Islamic jurisprudence. It is addressed in the detail and elaborated in all the four major Sunni schools of thought: Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali. All these schools base their conclusions on the application of Sharia capital punishment on interpretation of Qur'an, Hadith, and legal maxims. Understanding the classical juristic discussion on capital punishment is imperative for understanding the tradition of Islamic law with the contemporary means of dispensing justice. It also enables appreciating how classical Muslim jurists maneuvered between paradigms of justice, deterrence, and pardoning. The current article employs a qualitative and comparative approach to the classical law books of the four Sunni madhhabs to present their dissimilarity and similarity in their decisions on capital punishment. These traditional perceptions, now reflected in modernity, can help inform reforms in the law and the economies of value at human rights in Muslim nations. It also stops Sharia from being misused by maintaining control over the application of the death penalty in its historical jurisdiction and moral framework. In general, the four school of thought concur that death is applicable to murder, adultery by a married person and apostasy. Though capital punishment is valid under classical Islamic law, it is balanced with stringent conditions and procedural standards. A sophisticated understanding of such orientations is critical to create a balanced and equitable administration of the law in modern society.