HUDUD PUNISHMENTS IN ISLAMIC CRIMINAL LAW
Islam is more than a religion, it encompasses faith, culture, law and the social order. Islam proposes a society of righteousness and justice. Criminal behaviour is not tolerated in the Islamic order of society. Criminal behaviour is breach of God’s sovereignty, hence stiffer penalties are prescribed. This paper examines hudud punishments in Islamic penal system, and agitates for the reformation of Islamic criminal jurisprudence. While it is reasonable to punish offenders, and violators of normative principles, it is the opinion of this paper that punishments that are prescribed in municipal penal code should at least conform to international criminal jurisprudence.
Reforming Hudud ordinances to reconcile Islamic criminal law with international human rights law
International human rights laws are grossly violated by the hudud ordinances, with their extremely cruel punishments, including stoning for adultery, beheading for apostasy, and amputation for theft. Pakistan, Sudan, Brunei Darussalam and Saudi Arabia, for example, follow the doctrines of the four main Sunni schools of jurisprudence and enforce hudud ordinances, thereby violating some of the core international human rights law instruments to which they are State Parties. Orthodox Muslims generally defend the hudud ordinances, claiming that they are divine and immutable. This study refutes the aforementioned claim and demonstrates that it is legitimate and possible to reform hudud punishments to reconcile them with international human rights law. The thesis differentiates between Shariah and Islamic law. It argues that Shariah refers to the divine rulings recorded in the Qur'an and correct Sunnah, while Islamic law is not fully divine, for it includes also such prescriptions that have been developed by the human effort of Islamic jurists. The thesis demonstrates that reformation is an Islamic concept that requires that Muslims read the teachings of the Qur'an and the Sunnah in the context of their own time and environment. It is postulated, therefore, that the rulings of Islamic law need to be examined in the light of the Qur'an, the correct Sunnah and the Islamic core values promoted in them. These include several internationally protected human rights, such as the right to life, equality, and freedom of religion. The thesis points out that the main purpose of Shariah is to serve the benefit of the people and to protect them from harm. To this end, Shariah has provided the Islamic principles of reality and necessity. These require that the reality of life and the needs of the people be considered at all times. If necessary for the sake of the people, the principles allow for exceptions to be made to even definite provisions. It, further, demonstrates how these principles can be applied to reform the hudud ordinances to reconcile them with international human rights law. Mark A. Gabriel, 18 August 2016 © Mark A. Gabriel –– Ph.D. Research –– University of Cape Town iv Table of
La inseguridad jurídica en normas de contratación estatal
It is established by different studies that the issue of government procurement has been marred by several factors, the test objective to publicize these factors, we take as starting point the constant conflict between the branches of government to try and organize this subject; will collect and analyze diverse regulatory and case material in order to achieve evidence and demonstrate the different concepts of constant change that produces excessive regulation of the subject procurement and is in turn causing rapid changes that result in legal uncertainty for our law on the Contract Status.