There’s no bigger problem in ones study of the biblical writings than ones hermeneutics. Simply defined, hermeneutics is the science of scripture interpretation. What affects our hermeneutics, however, is our paradigm. In fact, if we all had the same paradigm, same IQ, and spent the same amount of time.

in our study of the writings, we would all draw the same conclusions. But, alas, God never made clones, people do that.

It was the Jewish paradigm that kept the majority of them from entering the Anointed’s kingdom. Jesus addressed it when he said, “No man puts new wine in old wine skins.” He knew that a new paradigm was necessary if they were going to be able to accept him.

Since we all obtained our paradigms from authority figures in our life such as parents, teachers, coaches and preachers, they rule our basic precepts and value systems. Let me quote Kuhn and Philip E Johnson.

“A paradigm is not merely a hypothesis, which can be discarded if it fails a single experimental test. It is a way of looking at the world, or some part of it, and scientists understand even the anomalies in its terms. According to Kuhn, anomalies by themselves never falsify a paradigm, because its defenders can resort to ad hoc hypotheses to accommodate any potentially disconfirming evidence. A paradigm rules until it is replaced by another paradigm… Kuhn described experimental evidence showing that ordinary people tend to see what they have been trained to see, and fail to see what they know ought not to be present. The finest scientists are no exception. On the contrary, because they are dependent upon inferences and upon observations that are difficult to make, they are particularly prone to paradigm-influenced misperception.”

Let me emphasize two major points of the above quote. 1) “…anomalies (things that don’t fit) by themselves never falsify a paradigm..”

When we hear things that do not fit what we’ve been taught as gospel, our tendency is to reject it out of hand. Our brain shuts down and refuses to consider the subject. The reason is simple. If we considered the subject we might be forced into changing our paradigm and that would be painful. No one likes change, especially to his way of thinking.

Jesus actually explained the problem the Jews had with new wine skins. Their attitude was simple, “. …the old is BETTER.” (Luke 5:36-39, emphasis mine)

That really explains the problem, doesn’t it? It’s not a question of whether the old is right, it’s just better. it’s comfortable. It’s traditional. It’s simple, It is the way things ought to be and remain. This explains why the Jews rejected Jesus outright. He simply didn’t conform to their paradigm — their idea of what the Messiah was supposed to be.

2) “…ordinary people tend to see what they have been trained to see, and fail to see what they know ought not to be present…”

I’m afraid Kuhn was being a little arrogant as he talks about “ordinary people” as if these exist in some unknown Eden, extraordinary people unaffected by paradigms. Such people do not exist in this reality. However, what he said is certainly true. People do tend to see what they’ve always been taught to believe and are generally blind to things that shouldn’t be included.

Simply put, paradigms can be real killers when it comes to truth seeking and our paradigm concerning biblical things is especially deadly. If this isn’t true, then why all the diverse religions in Christianity and the splintering even among the sects themselves? You can imagine how ridiculous all this division must appear in the eyes of unbelievers

And consider the extremes measures that paradigms have led to today and historically. The militant Islamic view that states that the United States is the great Satan and the world would be a better place if Americans were dead. So we see the destruction of the Twin Towers and attacks against Americans

everywhere. This paradigm is taught to their children and accepted. We consider them crazy and yet we are influenced just as deeply by our own paradigms.

One must remember, a person’s paradigm speaks nothing to whether the view is true or false, only that it is pervasive in our thinking. This pervasiveness is what makes it difficult in the extreme to examine closely another’s point of view. That’s why you here the old saw, “I will discuss anything but politics and religion.”

It was the influence of paradigm that inspired the Great Spanish Inquisition, resulting in the torturing and burning at the stake “heretics” across the European continent. In the examples already mentioned, militant Islam and “inquisitive” Christianity, the penalty was death to those that dared not share the pervasive paradigm.

Even in this land of religious tolerance you have the sordid example of a paradigm run amok in the Salem witch hunt in Massachusetts. We could multiply examples but you get the point.
In today’s evangelical religious atmosphere, heretics are “burned at the stake” by snubbing, excommunication, separation and any other means deemed appropriate by the majority view. After all, isn’t that what heresy is, going against the grain of the majority.

If we are going to be different and a truth seeker, we are going to have to examine our belief system carefully. We must ask ourselves where the fountain of our paradigm sprang. Did we arrive by independent and careful thought and study? Have we ever believed something to be true and later found out it wasn’t? We must be willing to step out of our paradigms without hanging our brains on the wall..

I will make a personal confession here. After having put in hundreds and hundreds of hours of bible study and years of authoritatively pontificating on many themes, I discovered I had been wrong about a great many things. I had accepted as true things that had guided and influenced my personal study and interpretation. I believed many untruths because they had “preached good” and were spoken by men I admired and wanted to emulate. I had laid a foundation upon the sand and I was truly appalled at the resultant collapse. Sigh.. Oh the strength and power of paradigms.

You may be a beginner in your search for biblical truth or you may have been around the sun a few more times like some, but it is never too late to consider your own paradigm. You can do better.

John

http://biblemaverick.com

U.S. Courts do not apply Islamic Shari’a law because it violates the Establishment Clause set in the United States Constitution; they apply foreign law when necessary. American Courts do apply foreign law in certain cases involving international principle known as “conflict of Laws,” or “Private International Law.” This is referred to in U.S. courts as “the doctrine of comity“.

In the area of Private International Law, Comity is a courtesy, amity, and reciprocity by U.S. courts towards court decision issued in other nations.  Such a consideration by U.S. courts does not entail an obligation to agree with the rulings of foreign judgments. There is therefore a distinction between the doctrine of comity and law.

Public International Law can become part of the national law when the country has its signature on that law, Private international Law however, does not have the same level of recognition by U.S. Courts. The issue of comity is raised in Islamic divorce cases when a person who resides legally in the United States travels to a foreign country and obtain a certificate of divorce from a religious court.

The intent is to obtain an instant divorce by pronouncing triple talaq (divorcing his wife three times in a few minutes.) Such an action leaves the wife with nothing more than a nominal deferred mahr, and takes advantage of the child custody, which discriminates against the women and to label the wife as bad Muslim.

The man then returns to the United States and serves his wife with divorce papers demanding the implementation of the divorce according to the Islamic Shari’a, claiming that the “doctrine of comity” applies to his case.

Generally, a judgment of divorce for example issued in a foreign country is recognized in the U.S. on the basis of comity, provided both parties to the divorce received adequate notice, i.e. service of process and, generally, provided one of the parties has a domicile in the foreign nation at the time of divorce, and the foreign court has given opportunity to both parties to present their case, and the trial was conducted upon regular proceedings after due citation or voluntary appearance of the litigants, and under a system of jurisprudence likely to secure an impartial administration of justice between the citizens of its own country, and those of other countries, an no prejudice towards either party and should not violate a strong U.S. principle of law, and the parties were present in court. The court may deny the application of comity if the judges deem the foreign laws is “repugnant” to U.S. principle of law.

An Islamic triple talaq differs substantially with respect to property division. Under Islamic Shari’a, wives may be entitled to a deferred mahr, which is, in most cases, much less than what U.S. courts order; above all, U.S. courts will not accept an Islamic divorce certificate obtained in a foreign country if the cause of action on which the divorce is based is “repugnant” to the public policy of the State in which the case is litigated.

Gabriel Sawma is Professor of Middle East Constitutional Law, Islamic Shari’a, Arabic and Aramaic. Expert on Islamic marriage contracts, Islamic divorce, child custody, inheritance, Islamic banking and finance. Editor of an International Law website: http://www.gabrielsawma.blogspot.com . Author of “The Qur’an: Misinterpreted, Mistranslated and Misread. The Aramaic Language of the Qur’an.” http://www.syriacaramaicquran.com. Author of an upcoming book on Islamic Divorce in US Courts. Email: gabrielsawma@yahoo.com

Republication of this article is permitted.

Job work is a wide phenomenon in production of goods and services. It is encouraged as it helps in cost control, specialization and extension of industrialization.

A job worker is engaged in processing material, supplied by principal manufacturers on job work basis. Such job work is covered under Business auxiliary service attracting service tax, when the process does not amount to manufacture. However, Notification 8/2005-S.T. dated 01.03.2005 exempt such job work on the condition that the processed material is returned to the principal manufacturer for further manufacture, on which finally duty is payable.

Sometimes job work may amount to manufacture. In such situation, Central Excise duty is payable. However, such payment of duty is exempted under Notification 214/86 or under Cenvat Credit Rules, if the processed material is returned to the principal manufacture, on which finally duty will be paid by the principal manufacturer.

While doing the job work, a job worker uses some of his inputs/input services. The purpose of this paper to examine as to whether the job worker is eligible for cenvat credit on inputs and input services used in providing such exempted job work. The other question arises as to how he can utilize this credit or how can he pass on credit to the principal manufacturer.

Job work is a widely followed practice. In this practice a principal manufacturer sends raw materials to job worker for various processing. In this processing, the job worker uses some consumables, minor materials, capital goods and input services.

This process involved in job work may amounts to manufacture, in which case Central Excise duty is payable, or may not amount to manufacture, in which case service tax is payable under the head business auxiliary service.

When processed goods after job work is returned to the principal manufacturer, which is further used by the principal manufacturer in further production on which ultimately Central Excise duty is paid; such job work is exempted from payment of Central Excise duty vide Notification 214/86 or under Cenvat Credit Rules & Service Tax is exempted under Notification 8/2005.

The first issue which is to be decided as to whether the person providing this exempted job work can Cenvat Credit or Not?

The job-worker is carrying job-work in terms of Central Excise & Service Tax law and procedures. Central Excise or service tax law and procedure does not prohibit a job worker from utilizing other inputs or input services in addition to raw material received by him from the principal manufacturer. There is no bar under in Central Excise from using own material in addition to material supplied by the principle manufacturer as this view is also held in Shakti Insulated Wires Ltd  Vs. CCE [1999 (114) ELT 424] further, it is submitted that a jobworker, after using his own inputs used in the job-work of the goods/raw materials can clear the said goods/raw materials to the principle manufacturer without payment of duty after availing the Cenvat credit on the inputs used by him, provided, the duty ultimately gets paid by the principle manufacturer.

In other words, a job-worker can avail Cenvat credit on the inputs/input services used by him in undertaking job-work and after availing Cenvat credit on such inputs/input services can clear the goods to the principle manufacturer without payment of duty only when, the duty is finally paid by the principle manufacturer. In this case, the duty does not get paid at the job-worker’s end at the time of clearence of the goods, but ultimately gets paid at the manufacturer’s end.

In the instant case the final product after the job-work is liable to excise duty and not exempted from duty.

Similar issue arose before Tribunal in case of Jindal Polymers Vs. CCE, Meerut-III [2001 (135) ELT 657] where it was held that the job-worker is entitled to cenvat credit on inputs used in the manufacture or processing of polymer/polyester chips on job-work, cleared without payment of duty to the parent manufacturer for manufacture of polyester/polymer filament yarn under notification no. 214/86 as polyester/polymer filament yarn being chargeable to excise duty.

The issue was examined by the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in Sterlite Industries (I) Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune [2005 (183) ELT 353] the larger bench of the Hon’ble Tribunal held that,

“In only case of Escorts Ltd. v. CC Ex, Delhi [2003 (160) E.L.T. 623 (Tri-Del.)] while interpreting Rule 57C of the Central Excise Rules, the Tribunal rejected the appellants claim of Modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of the parts, which were cleared without payment of duty to, appellant’s other unit under Chapter X procedure and utilised in the manufacture of tractor which were cleared on payment of duty by observing that since no duty was paid on the part at the time of clearance, Rule 57C will apply and no Modvat credit would be admissible. However, the said decision was subsequently reversed by the Supreme Court as reported in Escort v. C.C.Ex. [2004 (171) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.)]. For appreciation, we reproduce paragraphs 8 & 9 of the said decision.

It is to be seen that the whole purpose of the Notification and the Rules is to streamlines the process of payment of duty and to prevent the cascading effect if duty is levied both on the inputs and the finished goods. Rule 57D(2), which has been extracted hereinabove, shows that in the manufacture of a final product an intermediate product may also come into existence. Thus in cases where intermediate product may also come into existence. Thus in cases where intermediate product comes into existence, even though no duty has been chargeable to Nil rate of duty, credit would still be allowed so long as duty is paid on the final product. In cases of manufacturers like the Appellants the final product is the tractor. The intermediate product would be parts which are manufactured for being used in the tractor. In such a case the parts would not be the final product. Thus Rule 57C would have no application. The mere fact that the parts are cleared from one factory of the Appellants to another factory of the Appellants would not disentitle the Appellant from claiming benefit of Notification No. 217/86-C.E., dated 2nd April, 1986. As stated above, the Notification itself clarifies that the inputs can be used within the factory of production or in any other factory of the same manufacturer.”

By applying the ratio of the above decision, it becomes clear that Modvat credit of duty paid on the inputs used in the manufacture of final product cleared without payment of duty for further utilisation in the manufacture of final product, which are cleared on payment of duty by the principal manufacturer, would not be hit by provision of Rule 57C. Inasmuch as, the matter stands decided by the Honourable Supreme Court.

Similar view has also been taken in Bajaj Tempo Ltd. Vs. CCE, Pune [1994 (69) ELT 122], J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. CCE, Jaipur, [1996 (87) ELT 389.

In Shkti Insulated wires Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Custom Mumbai-V [2002 (149) ELT 668] the Hon’ble tribunal held that,

“2.The appellant? is engaged in the manufacture of paper covered copper strips falling under chapter sub-heading 8544 of the Central Excise Tariff Act. They manufactured the said products on a job work basis and also on their own account. The appellant sometimes received the inputs i.e. copper wires and/or rods from their principal manufacturer which, after processing by the appellant, are returned to their principal manufacturer under the provisions of Rule 57F(3) of the Central Excise Rules. When they clear such types of materials after processing, they do not pay duty as the duty on the final products are paid by the principal manufacturer. As far as the goods i.e. paper covered copper strips manufactured and finally cleared by the appellant on their own account, they pay duty on clearance. Show cause notice was issued charging the appellant that Modvat credit obtained by the appellant was inadmissible on the ground that they have availed inadmissible Modvat credit on insulated craft paper used in the processing of copper wire/rods received under the provisions of Rule 57F(3) which were further processed and cleared as paper covered copper strips without payment of duty under the provisions of Rule 57F(3) as it comes under the provisions of Rule 57C of the Rules. The Assistant Commissioner confirmed the demand. On appeal, the appellate authority confirmed the order-in-original. Hence the present appeals.

3.The learned? advocate for the appellant invited my attention to the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Jindal Polymers v. CCE – 2001 (135) E.L.T. 657 (T) = 2001 (43) RLT 680 where under similar circumstances the two member bench, after referring to the earlier judgment of the Tribunal, has upheld the claim of the job worker. Learned DR reiterates the impugned orders. I have considered the rival submissions and I am of the view that the said judgment is squarely applicable to the present case. I therefore allow the Appeal E/3264/2000, setting aside the impugned order with consequential relief.

4.As far as the? other Appeal E/3265/2000 is concerned, the inputs which the appellant manufactured have been captively consumed for the manufacture of final products which have been cleared by the appellant themselves and the said final product has also been cleared on job work basis. The circumstances, in my view, is also covered by the judgment of the Tribunal in Jindal Polymers case (supra). Hence this appeal also stands allowed, ordering consequential relief, after setting aside the impugned order.

It is to be noted that the case has been affirmed by the Supreme Court as reported in [2003 (151) ELT A89]. The case has also been affirmed by larger bench of the Tribunal Judgment in case of Sretlite Ltd quoted supra.

In Bharat Friz Werner Ltd v. CCE [2005 (191) ELT 1009], Hon’ble Tribunal held that,

“We have gone through the records of the case carefully. The appellants received certain dutiable inputs and manufactured machines. They utilised these machines for job work. After job work, the goods were sent under 57F(4) Challan to the principal manufacturers. The department is of the view that the machines manufactured by the appellant are exclusively used in the manufacture of the exempted goods. Therefore, the inputs are not entitled for Cenvat credit. In other words, the department is equating goods sent under 57F(4) challan with exempted goods. This is not correct. The goods, which are sent to principal manufacturer, are not exempted goods. Ultimately, they would be cleared on payment of duty. Hence, the reasoning adopted by the department is not correct. Moreover, all the case laws cited by the appellant are very relevant in deciding this issue. In the case of KSH International, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue appeal and held that clearance of goods on job work does not amount to clearance under full exemption or at Nil rate of duty. The ratio of this decision is squarely applicable to the present case. Under these circumstances, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned order.”

Recently the proposition has been followed in following case:

CCE Banglore v. South India Wire Products [2008 (228) ELT 290] R M Polypack v. CCE, Allahabad [2008 (226) ELT 591] CCE Mumbai v. National Standard [2008 (226) ELT 431] Shri Uma Foundaries v. CCE Kolkata [2008 (222) ELT 317]

In view of these binding judgment and settled position of law, following legal principles emerges:

Goods cleared under job work exemption are not exempted goods, as ultimately duty is paid by the principal manufacturer. The job worker is permitted to use his own capital goods/inputs/input services in the job work. When the job worker uses his own capital goods/inputs/input services in job work, he is entitled to take credit of duty on those capital goods/inputs/input services.

In view of this I am of the opinion that the a job worker, in abovesaid cisrcumstances is eligible to take Cenvat Credit on inputs and input services used in doing job work, on which ultimately duty burden will be discharged by the principal manufacturer.

As it is obvious that a job worker can take credit, the next question arises as to how the credit is to be utilized. In one situation the job worker may also be manufacturing on his own behalf, and he can utilize the credit for payment of duty on his own manufactured goods. If this is not possible, he may not avail the Service Tax exemption notification, and may opt to pay service tax on job charges, thereby passing on Cenvat Credit.

NOTIFICATION 8/2005-ST DATED 01.02.2005- CAN IT BE IMPOSED ON SERVICE PROVIDER:

It is a settled principle that an conditional exemption notification cannot be imposed on an assessee. The view has been upheld by Tribunal in case of Remedies Pharma v. CCE [1998 (101) ELT 344], CCE v. VIP Industry [1998 (103) ELT 95], Steelco Gujrat v. CCE [2000 (122) ELT 381] and numerous other cases.

The Notification 8/2005 is a conditional notification, conditions being,

“Provided that the said exemption shall apply only in cases where such goods are produced using raw materials or semi-finished goods supplied by the client and goods so produced are returned back to the said client for use in or in relation to manufacture of any other goods falling under the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (5 of 1986), as amended by the Central Excise Tariff (Amendment) Act, 2004 (5 of 2005), on which appropriate duty of excise is payable.”

As the exemption is conditional, it is the option of the assessee either to avail the exemption or not. In view of this, I am of the opinion that an assessee may refuse to avail the benefit of this notification and opt to pay service tax on output service of job work.

In view of these, the job worker is entitled to take cenvat credit on inputs, capital goods and input services while providing job work. Such credit is available, irrespective of the fact that whether he avails the benefit of exemption notification 8/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 or not.

The other option available to the assessee is not to avail service tax exemption 8/2005-ST dated 01.03.2005 and avail cenvat credit in inputs, capital goods and input services. In this case the job worker shall be paying service tax on job work done.

Rajesh Kumar, Advocate

Incoming search terms:

• how to avail cenvat credit on job work

When you go to a Social Security Disability hearing and you decided to do it alone without a disability advocate or attorney the chances of winning your case may drop or this may severely hurt the chances of being awarded benefits you really need.

Here is a very strong argument that you may not have heard before when it comes to getting adequate representation from disability advocates, and it happens to be based on experience from advocates that have been in the business for well over a decade.

A disability advocate was contacted by a claimant that was denied during their SSDI hearing. Advocates obtain a copy of the recording of the hearing process, as all SSDI hearings are recorded for just this reason. When the advocate listened to the audio tape, he noticed a few things that stood out immediately as proof that having an advocate on your side can really make a difference.

The hearing in question lasted less than a total of ten minutes, despite the fact that the average hearing typically goes for at least thirty minutes. When a hearing doesn’t even take twenty minutes, red flags are thrown up.

During the hearing in question, the judge never made an effort to advise the claimant that she had a right to fair representation.

Finally, the judge didn’t take the time to ask the claimant about any recent medical treatment since her initial application, nor did he try to gather any updated medical information so that her record could be updated, meaning that the SSA did not have her most recent information on file, and was lacking evidence that could have helped her in this process.

If this claimant had an attorney or another representative with her, this would not have been allowed to happen. She would have had someone on her side who could have informed her of her options, and made sure that the judge had all of the pertinent information, old and new.

From here, then, you have a choice between two options. There are advocates that will work to represent the claimants, or you have the choice to choose an attorney to hire, for this you can choose a lawyer that mainly handles these claims or one who is not a specialist in this line of law.

Neither of these options can provide you with a guarantee that they will be successful in securing the benefits that you are making the application for. This legal representation will guarantee that you will be ready for your hearing and properly prepared. This is one of the best things you can do when applying for Social Security benefits, as these professionals will know what to look for when it comes to making your best case.

There is no reason not to come equipped with an advocate on your side when applying for SSDI or appealing a decision regarding your SSDI and SSI benefits. Having SSDI experts on your side provides you with relief that someone is in your corner who knows what they are doing when filing for disability insurance or appealing a decision.

Analyses Islamic punishment

In

Iranian Islamic criminal code

Author: EHSAN ZARROKH

LLM OF ISLAMIC LAW

ZARROKH2007@YAHOO.COM

Abstract

I think criminal code is so important than other legal code because criminal law relevance to people life, honor and property so I think if you want scrutiny develop of society you must note to its criminal law & penal procedure. Iranian Islamic criminal law based on FIGH; so I explain some articles that exactly based on SHARI’A rules.

I try to state cause of Islamic rules and state roots of them with reference to KORAN, SUNNAH (stories of Islam messenger “MOHAMMAD”).

Here I say about “Rape, incest, adultery, Sodomy, Lesbianism, Pimping, Sexual Malicious Accusations, Intoxication, Civil Unrest (warfare and corruption on earth), Theft, Retaliated Punishments as Dead Penalty, Retaliated Punishments to Body Organs, Definition of Blood Money(mulct), Blood money for Murder, Liability for Blood Money, Causing a Crime, Blood Money for Body Organs, Blood Money for Abortion and …”.

Legislator in Article 12: There are five types of punishments: a) HAAD; b) GHESAS; c) DIYAT; d) TA’ZIRAT, e) DETERRENT PUNISHMENTS. Consider punishment.

3-1) HAAD

Under Article 13: HAAD is a punishment that its degree and type is not been specified in the SHAR’A.

HAAD divided into:

Rape [(sexual intercourse take by force) & incest (sexual intercourse with intimate woman) ZINA]

Sodomy [(anal intercourse) LAVAT]

Lesbianism [(female homosexuality) MOSAHEGHEH]

Pimping [manage a prostitution business (GHAVVADI)]

Sexual Malicious Accusations (GHAZF)

Intoxication [drunkenness (MASTI)]

Civil Unrest [warfare and corruption on earth (MOHAREBEH VA EFSADE FEL ARZ)]

Theft [robbery (SERGHAT E HAADDI)]

Rape & adultery & incest

Under Islamic criminal law we have three kinds of sexual relation: 1) rape: physically force another person to have sexual intercourse 2) incest: sexual intercourse with intimate woman like mother, sister… 3) adultery: sexual intercourse that adulterer & adulteress have wife or husband.

For make easier, in this article I don’t tell between them; in Article 64:” Adultery shall be punishable (subject to HAAD) when the adulterer or the adulteress is of age, sane, in control of his or her action and cognizant of the illicit nature of his or her act.” Legislator define ZINA; Ways to prove adultery in court are: 1) confession this way state in Article 68: “If a man or a woman repeats his or her confession of adultery four lashes before the judge, he or she shall receive the designated punishment, but if he or she repeats his or her confession fewer than four lashes, the punishment shall be at the judge’s discretion.” 2) Testimony this way state in Article 74: “Adultery, whether punishable by flogging or stoning, may be proven by the testimony of four just men or that of three just men and two just women.” And Article 75: “If adultery is punishable only by flogging it can be proven by the testimony of two just men and four just women.” Also I must say according to Article 76: “The testimony of women alone or in conjunction with the testimony of only one just man shall not prove adultery but it shall constitute false accusation which is a punishable act.” the testimony of women alone or in conjunction with the testimony of only one just man shall not prove adultery, because Islamic jurisconsult say women are sentiment and they can think well so can’t accept their testimony with out men in important cases and in these cases their problem in think eliminate with increase their number for testimony, so two woman are equal with a man.

Types of Punishments for Adultery state in 8 articles so I statement and explain them. Article 82: The penalty for adultery in the following cases shall be death, regardless of the age or marital status of the culprit: (1) Adultery with one’s consanguineous relatives (close blood relatives forbidden to each other by religious law); (2) Adultery with one’s stepmother in which the adulterer’s punishment shall be death; (3) Adultery between a non-Muslim man and a Muslim woman, in which case the adulterer (non-Muslim man) shall receive the death penalty; (4) Forcible rape, in which case the rapist shall receive the death penalty.

Article 83: Adultery in the following cases shall be punishable by stoning: (1) Adultery by a married man who is wedded to a permanent wife with whom he has had intercourse and may have intercourse when he so desires; (2) Adultery of a married woman with an adult man provided the woman is permanently married and has had intercourse with her husband and is able to do so again. Note: adultery of married woman with a minor is punishable by flogging.

I must say adultery of married woman with an insane man is punishable by stoning;

But adultery of married man with an insane woman is punishable by flogging; here we see difference between men and women, Islamic jurisconsult say if woman adultery with insane man, because the man is adult may inseminate her so her punished her by stoning; but I think just way is one punishment for man and woman. Article 84: Old married adulterers and adulteresses shall be flogged before being stoned.

Article 87: if a married man commits adultery prior to consummation [sexual intercourse], he will be sentenced to penance by lashes, shaving his hair and banishment for one year. But marriage enough for woman, doesn’t need to intercourse and they condemn to stoning.

Article 88: The punishment for an unmarried adulterer or adulteress shall be one hundred lashes.

Article 90: If a man or a woman has committed the act of adultery several lashes and has been punished after each act, he or she shall be put to death following his or her fourth act of adultery.

Article 94: if there is no hope for the recovery of the sick persons and the judge deems it appropriate for penance to be executed, a bunch of twigs or scourges consisting of one hundred scourges or twigs will be struck only once to the body of the condemned, although not all of the twigs or scourges may strike the body.

I must say under Islamic criminal law it called ZEGHS.

Article 95: if a person who is condemned to penance becomes an apostate [a born Muslim who changes his/her religious] or insane, the penance will not be valid.

Quality of Punishment

Article 100: The flogging of an adulterer shall be carried out while he is standing upright and his body bare except for his genitals. The lashes shall strike all parts of his body–- except his face, head and genitals– with full force. The adulteress shall be flogged while she is seated and her clothing tightly bound to her body.

Article 102: The stoning of an adulterer or adulteress shall be carried out while each is placed in a hole and covered with soil, he up to his waist and she up to a line above her breasts.

Jurisconsult says about reason of this article, that because woman breasts are salient she must placed in a hole and covered with soil up to her breasts; but I must say just way is both of them placed in a hole up to their breasts.

Article 103: if during stoning the stoned person flees from the pit and his/her adultery was proven by his/her confession, he/she will not be returned to the pit. But if his/her adultery was proven by the testifying of the witnesses, he/she will be returned to the pit for the stoning to be executed.

Note: if person who is sentenced to lashes flees, he/she will be returned for execution of the penance [whether the adultery was proven by his/her confession or testimony of witnesses].

Article 104: the stone shouldn’t be big enough to kill the person by one or two strike, neither should it be so small that it can’t called a stone.

Cause of legislation of this article is suffered of guilty.

Sodomy

Article 108: Sodomy is sexual intercourse with a male.

Article 109: In case of sodomy both the active and the passive persons will be condemned to its punishment.

Article 110: Punishment for sodomy is killing; the SHARI’A judge decides on how to carry out the killing.

Killing define in FIGH as kill with sword; throw of mountain, demolish wall on guilty and burn this one may attach to others.

Article 112: If a mature man of sound mind commits sexual intercourse with an immature person, the doer will be killed and the passive one will be subject to TA’ZIR of 74 lashes if not under duress.

Article 113: If an immature person commits sexual intercourse with another immature person, both of them will be subject to TA’ZIR of 74 lashes unless one of them was under duress. Articles 112 and 113 are most wondrous that child punished if they commit sodomy whereas article 49 state “minors, if committing an offence, are exempted from criminal responsibility. Their correction is the responsibility of their guardians or, if the court decides by a center for correction of minors.”

Ways of proving sodomy in court

Confessing and testimony these ways state in two articles:

Article 114: By confessing four lashes to having committed sodomy, punishment is

Established against the one making the confession.

Article 117: Sodomy is proved by the testimony of four righteous men who might have observed it.

Article 119: Testimony of women alone or together with a man does not prove sodomy.

Crimes dependent to sodomy

Article 121: Punishment for TAFKHIZ (the rubbing of the thighs or buttocks) and the like committed by two men without entry, shall be hundred lashes for each of them.

Article 122: If TAFKHIZ the like are repeated three lashes without entry and punishment is enforced after each time, the punishment for the fourth time would be death.

Article 123: If two men not related by blood stand naked under one cover without any necessity, both of them will be subject to TA’ZIR of up to 99 lashes.

Article 124: If someone kisses another with lust, he will be subject to TA’ZIR of 60 lashes.

Lesbianism (MOSAHEGHEH)

Article 127: MOSAHEGHEH (lesbianism) is homosexuality of women by genitals.

Article 128: The ways of proving lesbianism in court are the same by which the homosexuality (of men) is proved.

Article 129: Punishment for lesbianism is hundred (100) lashes for each party.

Article 131: If the act of lesbianism is repeated three lashes and punishment is enforced each time, death sentence will be issued the fourth time.

Article 134: If two women not related by consanguinity stand naked under one cover without necessity, they will be punished to less than hundred (100) lashes (TA’ZIR). In case of its repetition as well as the repetition of punishment, hundred (100) lashes will be hit the third time.

These articles define lesbianism and its condition and ways of prove it in the court.

But there is one grotesque article about prove lesbianism legislator state in Article 128: The ways of proving lesbianism in court are the same by which the homosexuality (of men) is proved, when this crime only committed with female and their testimony can’t prove it how prove it???!!!

Pimping (GHAVVADI)

Article 135: Pimping means that someone brings two individuals together or puts them in contact with each other for fornication or homosexuality.

Article 136: Pimping is proved by two confessions if the confessor is mature; of sound mind has free will and intention.

Article 137: Pimping is proved by the testimony of two righteous men.

Article 138: Punishment of a man for pimping is seventy (70) lashes and exile from the place of (his) domicile for a period of 3 months up to one year and punishment of pimping by a woman is seventy five (75) lashes only.

Difference between man & women in this article emanate than Islamic order about women that they must stay at home and doesn’t visited in society so Islamic legislator try to contemplate it.

Sexual Malicious Accusations (GHAZF)

Article 139: GHAZF (malicious accusation) means that someone associates fornication or sodomy with a certain person.

Article 140: Punishment for GHAZF (malicious accusation) is 80 lashes for a man or woman.

Note: execution of penance for false accusation is subject to the request of the accused

Article 146: false accusation will result penance if the accuser [i.e. the person who accuses] is mature, sane at liberty and intensive and the accused is also mature, sane, Muslim and righteous. If the accuser and accused don’t have one of these conditions, penance for false accusation will not be proven [should have been false accusation will not be proven]

Article 147: if a discerning minor falsely accuses another person, by the decision of the judge he/she will be subject to corrective measurement. If a mature and sane person falsely accuses a minor or a non-Muslim he/she will be sentenced to up to seventy four lashes.

Article 149: if a person falsely accuses his/her relatives, he/she will be penance.

Note: if a father or parental grandfather falsely accuses his son or grandson, he will receive punishment according to the TA’ZIR [up to seventy for lashes].

Articles 153: false accusation will be proven by two confessions or by the testimony of two just men.

Article 157: if a person falsely accuses other people on several occasions and he/she is penance after each occasion, on the fourth occasion he/she will be executed.

Article 164: the right or request for execution of penance will be transferred to all heirs except wife or husband. Every one of the heirs can request for the execution of penance, although the rest of the heirs have pardoned [the accused].

Intoxication (MASTI)

Intoxication means altering of one’s mental or physical state usually as a result of ingesting some substance; of euphoria, exhilaration; poisoning; under Islamic criminal law intoxication punished by HAAD.

Ways of prove

Article 168: if a person confesses twice to consumption of intoxicants, he/she will be penance.

Article 170: consumption will only be prove by testimony of two just man.

Article 171: if one of the two just men testifies that a person has consumed an intoxicant and the other testifies that the person has vomited an intoxicant, the penance is proven.

Article 174: The punishment for intoxication is 80 lashes for both men and women.

Article 176: When flogging is carried out, the man being flogged shall be in a standing position and be bared except for his genitals, whereas the woman being flogged shall be seated and her clothing tightly bound to her body.

Note. The face and head and genitals of the condemned shall not be struck by the lashes during flogging.

Article 179: if a person consumes an intoxicant several times and has received the penance after each consumption, on the third occasion he/she will be executed.

Article 180: if the condemned becomes insane or apostate, the penance will not be void. [I.e. it will not be executed]

Civil Unrest [warfare and corruption on earth (MOHAREBEH VA EFSADE FEL ARZ)]

Islamic legislator define warfare and corruption on earth in article 183″any person resorting to arms to cause terror, fear or to breach public security and freedom will be considered as a MOHAREB and be corrupt on earth.

Note 1: a person who draw arms on people but due to inability doesn’t cause fear isn’t a MOHAREB.

Note 2: if a person draws arms on one or several specific persons because of personal enmities, [he/she] will not be regarded as a MOHAREB.

Note 3: there is no difference between fire arms and cold weapons.”

Ways of prove

Article 189: propagation of MOHAREBEH and corruption on earth will be proven by one of following methods:

A) By confessing once provided the confessor is mature, sane and his confession is made intentionally and at free will.

B) Testimony of two just man.

Note 1: testimony of people who have been attacked by the MOHAREBSAND such testimonies which are in support of each other aren’t acceptable.

Note 2: if out of some people who have been attacked by the MOHAREBS, some testify that no harm was done to them, their testimonies will be accepted [as opposed to testimonies] of other.

Penance for MOHAREBEH and corruption on earth

Penance for MOHAREBEH state in article 190, this article state: “penance for MOHAREBEH and corruption on earth is one of the following four things:

1) execution

2) he/she shouldn’t remain crucified for more than three days, but if he/she dies within three days, he/she can be taken down [from the cross]

3) if he/she remains alive after three days [he/she] should not be killed

4) banishment”

Under Islamic law judge has the discretion of choosing one of the above four penance whether that has killed or injured someone or has taken someone’s property or has committed none of these.

Article 195: crucifixion of a MOHAREB will be executed as follows: [I.e. if crucifixion is the sentence, executing it will be as follows].

A) method of tying doesn’t kill him/her

B) He/she should not remain crucified for more than three days, but if he/she dies within three days, he/she can be taken down [from the cross].

C) If he/she remains alive after three days shouldn’t be killed.

D) Amputation of right hand and left leg will be by the same method as it is for “penance of theft”.

Theft (SERGHAT E HADDI)

Theft and conditions for come off it and ways of prove state with legislator in seven articles.

Define of theft state in article 197:”theft is stealing someone else’s property secretly. ”

Condition of theft state in article 198: 1) the owner has placed the property in enclosure [secure place]; I must say owner himself/herself not his/her proxy, 2) the theft either individually or in association with some-one else has broken the enclosure [secure place]; this bond means if (a) broken the enclosure and (b) steal property this isn’t theft with hard punishment(SERGHAT’E'HADDI) but it can be another type of theft (SERGHAT’E'TA’EZIRI); [there are two type of theft under Islamic criminal law theft, has these conditions called (SERGHAT 'E' HADDI) and other type is theft that hasn't these conditions called (SERGHAT 'E' TA'ZIRI).

Enclosure is a place where the property in placed in order to be secure from theft.

3) The theft is not the father of the owner. This bond issue from story of Islamic messenger (MOHAMMAD) and he said "you and your property belong to your father." According this story if father or parentally grandfather steals their children property they don't condemn to punishment of "SERGHAT 'E' HADDI".

Ways of prove

The theft which will result in penance will be proven by one of the following ways:

A) Testimony of two just men

B) Two confession pf thefts to the judge provided the confessor is mature, sane, free and purposeful.

C) Knowledge of judge.

Note: if the confession to the judge is made once by the thief, the thief should return the property to its owner but he will not be penance.

The punishment for theft is as follows: [under article 201]

A) On the first occasion amputation of the full length of four fingers of the right hand of the thief in such a manner that the thumb and palm of the hand remain.

B) On the second occasion amputation of the left foot in such a manner that half of the sole and part of the place of anointing [during ablution] remain.

C) On the third occasion [the punishment] is life imprisonment.

D) On the fourth occasion [the punishment] is execution even though [the fourth] theft was committed in prison.

Note 1: prior to the execution of the punishment, multiple thefts will be considered as one theft [I.e. if the previous thefts have not been punished they will be disregarded and only the current theft will be punished.

Article 202) if the fingers of the theft's hand are amputated and after the execution of the punishment, it is proven that he had previously committed a theft, his/her left foot will be amputated.

This sentence issue from KORAN, jurisconsults says because most of thefts occur with hand and the best way for prevent theft if amputate hand and because most of people do most their works with right hand so Islam said amputate it.

GHESAS [Retaliated Punishments]

Article 204: homicide [or murder] is divided into three categories: premeditated, unpremeditated, accidental.

In premeditated, murderer has intention to makes an action which is inherently lethal and intention to kill. But in Islamic criminal code where the murderer intends to kill a specific person or a non-specific person from a group whether his action is inherently lethal or not but the action result in murder, or where the murderer doesn’t intend to kill and his/her action isn’t inherently lethal to the person [who is murdered] because of [the murdered person's] condition such as illness, disability, old age, childhood and the like, and murderer aware of these conditions.

In unpremeditated murderer has murderer has intention to makes an action which is inherently lethal but doesn’t have intention to kill.

In accidental murderer doesn’t have intention to makes an action which is inherently lethal and intention to kill.

According to article 205 premeditated murders will result in retaliation (GHESAS) but for retaliation need some condition 1) murderer and slain must be Muslim because Muslim doesn’t retaliation for non-Muslim 2) if a Muslim man premeditatedly murders a Muslim woman, he will be sentenced to retaliation, but prior to retaliation the heir of the slain woman should pay half the mulct (blood money) of the man to him; because under article 300 “the mulct for a murdered Muslim woman is half of the mulct for a Muslim man no matter if the murder is premeditated or unpremeditated.” Reason for this article and difference inconspicuous but jurisconsults say because men supply expenditure family so his blood money must twice of woman blood money; but I have objection to their logic, A) their reasoning is authentic when women don’t work out of home, now in Iran we see so much women that they superintend their family B) if we accept this reasoning we must suffice to unpremeditated as this logic is against principle; altogether I think this article is against human rights and justice because KORAN said “there is life in retaliation” and this condition cause most of murderer don’t retaliation as most of Iranian family can’ pay half of men blood money and prefer to take her blood money.

3) If murder is slain father he doesn’t sentenced to retaliation article 220″a father or paternal grandfather who kills his child will not be retaliated and will be sentenced to mulct of murder which should be paid to the inheritors of the murdered” reason of this sentence that I said about theft “story of Islam messenger (MOHAMMAD) he said you and your property belong to your father”; this isn’t reasonable cause for legislation and conflict with Islamic doctrine, Islamic doctrine say children are present of GOD and don’t belong to parents, also in KORAN we don’t see any order about this; if we accept this order we must say children belong to their mothers not fathers so this order must state for mothers.

Altogether order like this cause some father kill their children especially girls, [we see instance of this in KHOZESTAN (a state located south of Iran)].

Under article 222 if a sane person murders an insane person he/she will not be retaliated; this article says another condition: wisdom.

If several Muslim men kill a Muslim man the heir of the slain must pay their blood money to retaliation all of them or only retaliation one of them.

I must say under article 211 “reluctance to commit murder or committing murder on the order of another person isn’t a license to commit murder; and murderer condemn to retaliation; and who has ordered the murder or who has forced the murder to be committed will be sentences to life imprisonment.”

Ways to Prove Murder in Court

Article 231 say “methods of proving murder in the court are:

A) confession

B) testimony

C) compurgation

D) judge’s own knowledge

Article 232 states: by confessing to premeditated murder, the premeditated murder is proven; even the confession is made once.

Article 237 state: (1) First degree murder shall be proven by testimony of two just men; (2) Evidence for second-degree murder or manslaughter shall consist in the testimony of two just men, or that of one just man and two just women, or the testimony of one just man and the sworn testimony of the accuser.

Article 239 state: if due to some indications or by another means such as testimony of one witness, presence of a person with traces of offence at the scene of crime, presence of murdered at the residence or place of frequent of person, testimony of trustworthy discerning child, or the like, the judge suspect that the accuses has committed the crime, this [suspicion] will be of the cases of doubt.

In case of doubt, first-degree murder may be proved by the sworn testimony of 50 men who must be sanguineous relatives of the claimant. If the number of the sworn testimonies does not reach 50, any of the male testifiers may repeat his oath as many lashes as it is necessary to constitute 50 testimonies. If the claimant cannot present any of his sanguineous male relatives to provide sworn testimony in support of his or her claim, the claimant may repeat the sworn testimony 50 lashes, even if she is a woman. The claimant [in the case of murder] may be either a man or a woman but in either case he or she must be one of the victim’s inheritors.

Under Islamic criminal law if prior to dying, the murdered person remits the murderer from retaliation, retaliation will be null and the heirs of the murdered person can’t ask for retaliation; but Islamic law doesn’t determine are they can ask blood money or not? I think because this is premeditated and under article 205 its punishment is retaliation; then murdered remits murderer his/her heirs can ask blood money.

Retaliation of limb

Premeditated mayhem or injury of limb will result in retaliation, and unpremeditated and accidental mayhem will punished by blood money.

In retaliation for limb other than the condition aforesaid of life: A) limbs are equally healthy (unless eyes: the healthy eye will be retaliated for unhealthy one) B) limbs are equally genuine [not artificial] C) equality in location of injured or cut of limb (unless hand) D) retaliation doesn’t result in death or detect of another limb E) retaliation doesn’t exceed the crime.

I must say according to article 273: in retaliation for limb, men and women are equal and a male offender will be sentenced to retaliation for the same limb as he has defected from a woman unless the mulct for the defected limb is one third or more than one third of full mulct (means men mulct not women) in which case in order to retaliation, the woman should pay the mulct of the limb to the man.

This article is Incomprehensible; perhaps women pain for injury is half of men.

Altogether Iranian Islamic rules about retaliation need to change and adjustment with humanity.

Mulct (DIYAH)

Article 294 defines mulct it says: mulct is property which should be paid to a victim of murder or his/her heirs and a victim of injury.

Responsibility of paying the mulct

In premeditated an unpremeditated murders, the murderer is responsible for paying the mulct and in accidental murders, if the murder was proven either by evidence, compurgation [oath taking] or knowledge of the judge, the paternal relative (A’GHELEH) with the exception of women [of the murderer] is responsible for paying the mulct, but if the murder is proven by the confession of the murderer doesn’t compurgation or doesn’t take oath [he/she] is responsible to pay the mulct.

A’GHELEH this term has no English equivalent but refers to the person who is responsible for payment of mulct, other than the criminal. It has been defined as “paternal relative with the exception of woman” throughout this translation] is defined as paternal relatives with the exception of woman who are regarded as inheritors of a person. These people are equally responsible for the payment of mulct.

Under article 315: if two people are accusing of having committed a crime Ana each one accuses the other one of having committed the crime, and it can be proven which one was the murderer, one of them should pay the mulct by drawing lots.

Perhaps you think this isn’t square order, but I evidence this is a square order, according to supposition state in this article we sure one of these two people is murderer, perhaps you think its better we divided mulct into both of them; but I say when we take mulct than both of them certainly we punished innocent person but when we drawing lots we punished one of them and its probable he/she is guilty or innocent; so this way is next to be justice.

Cause of responsibility

A) Conduction means: committing a crime directly by the criminal.

B) Cause means: when a medical doctor, even if it is a skilled one, treats [a patient] directly or orders the treatment to be made, even if the treatment is done with the permission of the patient or [his/her] guardian and the treatment result in loss of life or causes a defect, that medical doctor is responsible and hence should pay for the damage.

Important note is: any crimes causing complete or partial loss of mind don’t result in retaliation and always punished by mulct.

The amount of mulct for loss sense is determine by legislator but the amount of mulct for loss of sense of taste is decided by judge, that called “A’RSH”.

If some one shoots bullet or things similar it to men he/she must pay 2600 us dollar as mulct (2007/3/25) but if he/she shoots to woman his/her punishment determine with judge (A’RSH); really this one hasn’t any reason and certainly against humanity.

Mulct for abortion

When embryo hasn’t soul apply equally to male and female embryo in amount of mulct but when the embryo has soul and the embryo is a boy, full mulct applies; if the embryo has a soul and the embryo is a girl, half mulct applies and if the sex of the soiled embryo isn’t clear, three quarters of mulct applies.

TA’ZIRAT

TA’ZIR is a punishment that its degree and type is not been specified in the SHARI’A and it is up to the decision of the judge. TA’ZIR can be in the form of imprisonment, fines, or flogging (it should be less than HADD).

Articles 498 up to 729 are about TA’ZIR; it does contain 29 chapters:

1: Crimes against National Security. 2: Insulting the Religious Sanctities or State Officials. 3: Insulting or Attempting at Foreign State Officials. 4: Producing False Money. 5: Forgery and Fraud. 6: Breaking Official Stamps. 7: Escaping from Prison. 8: Usurpation. 9: Damaging Historical Properties. 10: Wrongdoing of State Officials. 11: Usury and Bribery. 12: refuse to do legal duty. 13: Disobedience of State Officials. 14: Attacks on State Officials. 15: Personal Insults. 16: Compliance in a Crime. 17: Offenses against people and children. 18: Offenses against Public Moral. 19: Offenses against Family Duties. 20: Lying under oath. 21: Theft. 22: Threatening.

23: Bankruptcy. 24: Violation of Consignment. 25: Incineration and Damaging Properties or Animal. 26: Violating real estates and other properties. 27: Libels and Revilements .28: Intoxication, Gambling, and Vandalism. 29: Violating Traffic Rules

Deterrent punishment

Deterrent punishment is a punishment that is imposed by the government in order to maintain the public order. It can be in the form of imprisonment, fines, or flogging (it should be less than HADD). This means reign orders that issue from government and most of them don’t have SHARI’A roots.

At the end I must say I try to explain the most important articles that correlate to humanity; and state reason of them, I hope my article helps you to have good view about Islam and its legal system.

Incoming search terms:

• criminal code islamic law
• adultery punishment in cyprus
• criminal code of Islam
• islamic criminal code
• islamic law: ghesas