Parliaments of countries may contact the author of the form for free consultation. The author of the form is willing to travel anywhere to meet members of parliaments and state officials to provide free advice without fees or expenses.
The author calls on Muslim jurists to cooperate in order to strengthen the criminal law model by completing, revising it, or correcting any unintended errors.
Important Notes
This sample penal code focuses on hudud, retaliation, and a few examples of ta’zir crimes. Not all rules of evidence are covered in this model. However, it is necessary to emphasize some rules of proof, such as doubt, which prevents punishment by punishment and retaliation.
The legislative authority should enact crimes parallel to hudud crimes and retaliation – under the category of ta’zir, with less stringent standards of proof. For example, the legislature should enact the crime of premeditated murder from the category of retaliation, which is punishable by death. It is necessarily known that the death penalty may only be imposed if all Islamic evidentiary requirements are met, including two valid Muslim witnesses who witnessed the murder – if the accused is Muslim – and that there is no doubt whatsoever that the accused committed the crime. The legislator must also enact another crime of premeditated murder, which falls under the category of discretionary crimes and is punishable by a penalty less than the death penalty – imprisonment, for example – if the Islamic rules of evidence for retaliation crimes are not met. Accordingly, if there is a slight suspicion that the accused has committed a murder, he must be convicted of premeditated murder, which is punishable by imprisonment, because the rule in hudud crimes and retaliation is that any doubt precludes the specific punishment for hudud crimes and retaliation. Likewise, a person accused of theft may be punished under the category of ta’zir if there is slight suspicion because this slight suspicion is sufficient to prevent the punishment for theft from being punished.
Excuses that exempt from punishment and mitigate punishment must be interpreted broadly in hudud crimes and retaliation in a way that reduces liability. However, this policy may not be followed in ta’zir crimes.
