Rethinking Jurisprudential Evidences for the Death Penalty in Relation to Repeatation of Specific Crimes (Hudud)

Abstract

AbstractAccording to a seemingly well-known opinion between Shi’ite jurists, ifsomeone commits a prescribed crime (hadd) four times, he would beconvicted to the death penalty if the punishments for the three previouscrimes have been carried out. This article critically re-reads the evidencesand arguments supporting this opinion. Due to the weakness of somenarrations in the field, serious conflict between them and the possibility ofhistorical interpretation of them, the author comes to the conclusion thatimplementing the death penalty for repeating prescribed crimes (hudud) isnot a mandatory prescribed punishment.Alternatively, the article suggests providing a preventive punishment insteadof the death penalty particularly when the offender is repentant and/or thesociety can be protected from the evil and harm of the offender by otherways. The idea is consistent with the foundations of Islamic law particularlywith the principle of precaution (ihtiyat) in human life which has beeninsisted in the Holy Legislator’s teachings in various ways.

Keywords

• key words: islamic criminal jurisprudence
• shi’i islam
• recidivism
• death penalty
• habitual offenders