حدود بخشی از قوانین کیفری اسلام است که مجازات آن در برابر کارهای خلاف عفت و اخلاق اعمال میشود و کیفر ثابت و مشخص دارد. موضوع اجرای حدود در زمان غیبت امام عصر، یک بحث جدی فقهی است که اقوال مختلفی درباره آن وجود دارد. از طرفی برخی فقها، قائل به اجرای مطلق حدود شرعی در زمان غیبت هستند و عدهای دیگر نیز معتقدند که حدود در زمان غیبت جاری نمیشود و صرفا باید به دست امام معصوم اجرا شود.
جرایم مستوجب حد[ویرایش]
در قانون مجازات اسلامی، تخلفاتی که موجب حدود میشود، نام برده شدهاند:
حد زنا در اسلام، صد ضربه شلاق است. چنانچه زنا، از زنان و مردان همسردار سرزند، زنای محصن نامیده میشود و حد آن مجازات سنگسار است. در قرآن، به مجازات سنگسار اشارهای نشدهاست؛ اما در احادیث به تواتر ذکر شدهاست. کیفر تنها در صورتی اعمال میشود که زنا با اقرار زناکننده یا با شهادت چهار شاهد مرد یا سه مرد و دو زن، اثبات شود. در فقه شیعه، اگر زن بیشوهری باردار شود مورد حد قرار نمیگیرد؛ اما در برخی مذاهب اهلسنت بارداری زن بیشوهر میتواند بینه زنا محسوب شود و زن مورد محاکمه قرار میگیرد. کیفر پیرمرد و پیرزن همسردار که مرتکب زنا شوند، ابتدا تازیانه خوردن و سپس سنگسار است.
در قرآن، کیفر لواط معین نگردیدهاست. چنانچه هر دو مرد که مرتکب لواط شدهاند، بالغ و عاقل باشند، حکمشان اعداماست؛ خواه مجرد و خواه همسردار، خواه مسلمان یا کافر باشند. نحوهٔ اعدام برای لواط، در فقه شیعه، یکی از موارد زیر است:
مساحقه (رابطهٔ جنسی از طریق آلت تناسلی) میان دو زن، کیفر ۱۰۰ ضربه تازیانه را برای آنها به همراه خواهد داشت. در صورت تکرار این عمل و اجرای حد به دنبال آن، در مرتبه چهارم اعدام میشوند.
کسی که مشروبات الکلی بنوشد، حد وی ۸۰ ضربه تازیانهاست، خواه مرد باشد یا زن. در صورت تکرار شرابخواری و اجرای حد، در مرتبه سوم اعدام میشود.
در فقه شیعه، حد سرقت در مرتبه اول قطع چهار انگشت از مفصل اصلی دست راست است؛ اما در فقه اهلسنت، یک دست قطع میشود. در فقه شیعه، حد تنها وقتی اجرا میشود که دزد بالغ، عاقل و مختار باشد و برای رفع اضطرار سرقت نکرده باشد. در فقه شیعه، چنانچه دزد دوباره دزدی کند، پای چپش را از زیر قبه پا قطع میکنند و اگر بار سوم دزدی کند، به حبس ابد محکوم میشود تا در زندان بمیرد. و اگر بار چهارم، در زندان دزدی کند، اعدام میشود.
ارتداد خارج شدن از اسلام است. اگر شخص بالغ، عاقل و مختار، از دین اسلام برگردد؛ از وی خواسته میشود که توبه کند و به اسلام برگردد وگرنه اگر مرد باشد اعدام میشود و اگر زن باشد حبس ابد شده و در زمان نمازهای پنجگانه شلاقش میزنند، و در معیشت و آب و غذا و لباس آنقدر بر او سخت میگیرند تا توبه کند.
پیوند به بیرون[ویرایش]
This article is about the concept of Hudud in Islamic law. For the Hudud ordinances in Pakistan, see Hudood Ordinance.
"Hadd" redirects here. For hydroxyapatite deposition disease (HADD), see Calcific tendinitis. For the concept of a Hyperactive Agent Detection Device (HADD), see agent detection.
Hudud (Arabic: حدود Ḥudūd, also transliterated hadud, hudood; singular hadd, حد, literal meaning "limit", or "restriction") is an Islamic concept, based on Quran and Hadiths, that define "crimes against God". These include the religious crimes of adultery, fornication, homosexuality, accusing someone of illicit sex but failing to present four Muslim eyewitnesses, apostasy, consuming intoxicants, transgression, robbery and theft.
Under Sharia, the Islamic religious law, hudud crimes trigger a class of punishments which are considered by Muslims to be mandated and fixed by God. These range from public lashing, publicly stoning to death, amputation of hands or public execution. However, public stoning and execution punishments are relatively uncommon in the modern times in most Muslim nations, and are currently witnessed in Muslim nations, such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, that follow strictest interpretation of sharia.
Sharia recognizes other crimes that are not hudud crimes. One category of non-hudud crimes is Qisas – considered by sharia to be private dispute between two parties where retaliation as a punishment is allowed. The second category is Tazir – where the punishment is left to an Islamic judge's discretion.
Hudud crimes are defined in Quran and Hadiths, and are considered as "claims of God". The sovereign Muslim state had the obligation and responsibility to punish hudud crimes. All other offenses were defined as "claims of [His] servants," and responsibility for prosecution rested on the victim.
The hadd crime of robbery and civil disturbance against Islam inside a Muslim state, according to Muslim scholars, is covered by Quranic verse 5:33:
The hadd crime of intoxication is covered by Quranic verse 5:90, but its punishment is described in hadiths:
The hadd crime of illicit consensual sex is covered by several verses, including Quranic verse 24:2:
The hadd crime of "accusation of illicit sex or rape against chaste women without four witnesses" and of "apostasy from Islam" is based on Quranic verses 24:4, 24:6, 9:66 and 16:106, among others Quranic verse 
The sahih hadiths, a compilation of sayings, practices and traditions of Muhammad as observed by his companions, are considered by Sunni Muslims to be the most trusted source of Islamic law after Quran. They extensively describe hudud crimes and punishments. In some cases where the Quran specifies the hadd crime but does not state the punishment, Islamic scholars have used hadiths to establish the hadd punishment. Some of these are,
Hudud versus other category of crimes
Hudud offenses include:
Murder, injury and property damage are not hudud crimes
Murder, in Islamic law, is not a hadd crime, but is treated as a private dispute between the murderer and the victim's heirs. The heirs of the victim(s) may have no claims, or may be awarded the right to forgive the murderer, or demand compensation (see Diyya) or demand death of the murderer (see Qisas). The heirs may have no claims in cases where the accused "justifiably kills the victim" such as in cases where the murder victim was engaged in illicit sex, blasphemy or apostasy from Islam. Honor crimes, where a Muslim woman is killed by her family or relatives because her sexual behavior brought dishonor to the family, is treated as a civil matter. Similarly, bodily harm and property damage, are considered as a non-criminal, civil dispute between two parties.
Sunni versus Shia interpretations
There are minor differences in views between the four major Sunni madhhabs about sentencing and specifications for these laws, in the matter of Baghj (dispute or open criticism of a religious authority such as an Imam). Baghj is considered as violation of Quranic verse 49:9, and a hadd crime in all Sunni and Shia schools of law; however, unlike other hadd crimes, the verse suggests that the accused violator of the Islamic law be counseled, and various fiqhs differ on the required process before punishment is handed out. In other categories and cases, Sharia is God's law in Islam, specifying certain punishments for each crime, they are immutable. They are considered claims of God, revealed through Muhammad, and they cannot be altered or abolished by people, jurists or parliament. Anyone once charged with a hadd crime must be pursued by the Muslim state, that charge cannot be retracted, nor can any authority grant a pardon. He or she must be punished.
The hudud punishment for theft was carried out on several hundred individuals, during the first two years when Shari`a was made state law in Sudan between 1983 and 1985 and then was withdrawn from application but not from the law. Flogging for moral charges have been carried out since the codification of Islamic law in Sudan in 1991 without withdrawal from application. In 2012, a Sudanese court sentenced Intisar Sharif Abdallah, a teenager to death by stoning, in the city of Omdurman, near Khartoum, under article 146 of Sudan’s Criminal Act after charging her with "adultery by a married person". She was held in Omdurman prison with her 5-month-old baby, with her legs shackled.
The hudud punishment for zināʾ in cases of consensual sex, and the punishment of a victim for her failure to present four male Muslim witnesses in cases of rape, are the subject of a global human rights debate.
The requirement of four male witnesses before a victim can seek justice has been criticized as leading to "hundreds of incidents where a woman subjected to rape, or gang rape, was eventually accused of zināʾ" and incarcerated, which is defended as punishment ordained by God. Hundreds of women in Afghanistan jails are victims of rape or domestic violence, accused of zina, when the victim failed to present witnesses. In Pakistan, over 200,000 zina cases against women, under its Hudood laws, were under process at various levels in Pakistan's legal system in 2005. In addition to thousands of women in prison awaiting trial for zina-related charges, there has been a severe reluctance to even report rape because the victim fears of being charged with zina.
Requirements for conviction
Sharia in certain legal system such as the Hudud Bill in Kelantan, Malaysia permits only Muslim eyewitness testimony and confession as evidence. Circumstantial and forensic evidence (i.e., fingerprints, ballistics, body fluids, DNA etc.) is rejected in rape and other hudud cases, only eyewitnesses or confession are acceptable for conviction in hudud crimes. However, indirect evidence such as pregnancy in the accused are acceptable sufficient evidence of zina, in certain cases.
For eyewitness testimony, Hudud crimes require four male witnesses, all providing a consistent testimony. A confession must be repeated four times, and he or she can retract the confession at any time during the trial.
Main article: Zina
There are certain standards for proof that must be met in Islamic law for zina punishment to apply. In the Shafii, Hanbali, and Hanafi law schools Rajm (public stoning) or lashing is imposed for the religiously disallowed sex only if the crime is proven, either by four male adults witnessing at first hand the actual sexual intercourse at the same time or by self-confession. For the establishment of adultery, four male Muslim witnesses must have seen the act in its most intimate details. Shia Islam allows substitution of one male Muslim with two female Muslims, but requires that at least one of the witnesses be a male. The Sunni Maliki school of law, and Shia Islamic law considers pregnancy in an unmarried woman, or contested pregnancy in case of married woman, as sufficient evidence of zina. If a woman such as a rape victim or uninvolved person alleging zina fail to provide four consistent Muslim witnesses, he or she can be sentenced to eighty lashes for unfounded accusation of fornication." The requirement of four upstanding male Muslim witnesses to provide evidence for rape has been criticized as making it difficult for rape victims to achieve justice.
Malik, the originator of the Maliki judicial school of thought, recorded in The Muwatta of many detailed circumstances under which the punishment of hand cutting should, and should not, be carried out. Commenting on the verse regarding theft in the Quran, Yusuf Ali says that most Islamic jurists believe that "petty thefts are exempt from this punishment" and that "only one hand should be cut off for the first theft." Islamic jurists disagree as to when amputation is mandatory religious punishment.
Modernization versus tradition
Scholars suggest that "such penalties may have been suitable for the age in which Muhammad lived. However, as societies have since progressed and modernized, they are not suitable any longer." Other scholars write that "here and at other places the Qur'an merely declares that sodomy is such a heinous sin ... that it is the duty of the Islamic State to eradicate this crime and ... punish those who are guilty of it."
It has also been argued that the Hudud portion of Sharia is incompatible with International laws on human rights. However, the trend has been to introduce hudud laws in various Muslim countries. Pakistan and Brunei have adopted hudud laws in 1979 and 2014 respectively. A Washington Times editorial called Pakistan's Hudood ordinance, "a set of laws passed in 1979 in response to pressure from hardline Islamic political groups that odiously punished rape victims while making it difficult to convict the perpetrators".
Liberal movements in Islam and Quranists have called for return to Quran, and removal of punishments declared in Hadith. They reject the Hadiths as a source of law. They suggest that the verses in the Quran should be the only source for formulating Islamic Law, and only laws derived exclusively from the Quran are valid.
The vast majority of Muslims, however, consider hadiths, which describe the words, conduct and example set by Muhammad during his life, as a source of law and religious authority. Similarly, most Islamic scholars believe both Quran and sahih hadiths to be a valid source of Sharia, with Quranic verse 33.21, among others, as justification for this belief.
For vast majority of Muslims, Sharia has historically been, and continues to be derived from both Quran and Sahih Hadiths. The Sahih Hadiths contain isnad, or a chain of guarantors reaching back to a companion of Muhammad who directly observed the words, conduct and example he set – thus providing the theological ground to consider the hadith to be a sound basis for sharia, which includes hudud crimes and punishments.