The death penalty in the philosophy of Islamic jurisprudence is (the penalty determined in the interest of the group). The punishment is intended to reform the individual, protect the group and maintain its system. Punishment in Islamic law is defined in a framework, or discretionary, delegated to the opinion of the group or whoever expresses it.
The Islamic legislation takes the punishments specified by mitigating excuses, and makes the implementation of these punishments accompanied as possible by these excuses (protect the boundaries with suspicions). The legislator leaves it to the will of the group or whoever expresses it to assess the discretionary punishment (death penalty) and to dispose of it, with aggravation or reduction, as required by the group's interest. It also leaves a wide margin for the judge to determine the size of the penalty imposed in individual incidents that are similar in their different form in their circumstances. The judge in the Islamic justice curriculum has an active presence in estimating the size of the punishment, and is not automatically executing what the strict laws draw.
Muslim jurists state that punishments (prohibitions before the action and marriage after it) and that the limit of punishment - discretionary punishment - is the group's need and interest. If the interest of the group calls for strictness, the punishment is increased, and if the group’s interest requires mitigation, the penalty is commuted. It is not correct for the punishment to be more or less than the group's need. As for the (specific) penalties, if they are triggered by suspicion, that is, they are taken with any mitigating excuse, then they turn into a discretionary punishment, meaning that the punishment is not completely dropped, but rather it is left to the discretion of (the legislator) and (the judge).
In the philosophy of Islamic legislation, disciplining the criminal does not mean revenge against him, but rather reclaim it. The jurists believe, as Imam al-Mawardi says in al-Ahkam al-Sultani: Punishment (discipline of reclamation and rebuke differs according to the difference of sin). Ibn Taymiyyah, may God Almighty have mercy on him, states that punishments are: (Rather, a mercy has been prescribed by God to His servants, for they are issued by the mercy of creation and the will to do good to them, and that is why those who punish people for their sins should intend by this to be kind to them and have mercy on them, just as the father intends to discipline the child, and as the doctor intends to treat the patient. ).
The philosophy of punishment oscillates between two considerations: the first consideration is the interest of the group and what requires the severity of the punishment, neglecting the interest of (the individual), or considering the interest of (the individual), who is here the perpetrator or the offender, and neglecting the interest of the group. Islamic legislation balances the consideration of those who are responsible. He was committed to the interest of the group in all cases, and cared about the individual in most cases. That is, the Islamic legislation adopted the principle of protecting the community upon its release, and sought this dimension in all the prescribed punishments, and this is what it expressed (by rebuking), as it adopted the principle of protecting the individual where possible, meaning that it approved the punishment in a spirit of discipline and reform, and urged pardon and transgression in their position.
In our evaluation of any legislative system that guides us to the truth in it, the answer to the following question: Does the penal code produce an enclosure of the world of crime, a draining of its sources, and a reduction in the violence of criminals? The answer to this question forms the basis for those who pray to their people. The criminals in the humanitarian civil society are getting more and more generous, violent and cruel. The incidents of murder, robbery, rape and corruption, which are the most threatening crimes to civil society in this era, are getting harsher and more widespread.
In the philosophy of the penal law, which is presented in the context of a general global trend, the texts of legislation tend to narrow the circle of social prohibitions, expand the circle of individual freedom, reduce the scope of responsibility, and dilute or exceed penalties.
Within the framework of this philosophy, we follow the urgency of international human rights organizations, on behalf of the United Nations, calling for the abolition of the death penalty from the context of international law, and this punishment has actually been abolished in France, Germany, Austria, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, Canada, New Zealand, and the countries of Central America and South America. , South Africa, and partly abolished in Belgium, Spain, Italy and England. The men of these organizations are still campaigning to make the abolition of this punishment an agreed international humanitarian obligation.
Our belief in the value and sanctity of human life has no limits. Our keenness on this life makes us tighten its protection, and we see the deterrent punishment as a true bridge for rebuking it from underestimating it.