نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
استادیار، گروه فقه و حقوق پژوهشکده نظامهای اسلامی، پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و اندیشه اسلامی، قم، ایران.
چکیده
کلیدواژهها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Today, one of the issues in academic and public arenas in Iranian society is the methods and types of selecting punishments for the crime of moharebeh (refers to a specific crime in Islamic law, often interpreted as waging war against God or spreading corruption on Earth). The legislator, during the process of law-making after the Islamic Revolution of Iran, has shown a greater inclination towards the discretionary view in choosing among the four types of punishments for moharebeh in the laws. This article, using a descriptive-analytical method and focusing on the verses of the Qur’an and the narratives concerning moharebeh, criticizes the legislator's approach. It emphasizes that the opinion advocating for order or proportionality between the crime and the punishment for moharebeh can be inferred from Qur’anic and narrative evidence and is, in fact, consistent with the Qur’anic verses. The most important achievement and innovative aspect of this article compared to other writings is, firstly, that the apparent meaning of the verse on moharebeh concerning discretion is disputable. Some prominent scholars, including Qutb al-Din al-Rawandi and Allameh Helli, believe that the verse indicates a sequential order. Secondly, multiple verses of the Qur’an support the principle of proportionality, which clarifies or removes any ambiguity from the verse on moharebeh. The verse on moharebeh cannot be interpreted contrary to the apparent meaning of numerous other Qur’anic verses. Thirdly, the verses indicating the necessity of proportionality between crime and punishment are exempt from any limitation or restriction. As some commentators explicitly state, the lack of proportionality between crime and punishment is considered injustice, and injustice is both rationally and legally forbidden (haram). Fourthly, the verses and narratives indicating the necessity of proportionality between crime and punishment are explicit texts (nass), whereas the verse on moharebeh (assuming it indicates discretion) and the narratives indicating discretion are apparent (zahir); and explicit texts are prioritized over apparent ones. Fifthly, the desirability of adhering to proportionality between the crime of moharebeh and its punishment is unanimously agreed upon by all jurists, and none of them consider a ruling that observes proportionality between crime and punishment to be contrary to Sharia. In contrast, failing to observe proportionality in moharebeh is, according to the most jurists’ opinion, against Sharia.
کلیدواژهها [English]
قرآن کریم
)