Is scientific evidence permissible in the case of rape?
The following verse seems to indicate that science can be used to determine guilt or innocence:
“But if it be that his shirt is torn from the back, then is she the liar, and he is telling the truth!” ( سورة يوسف , Yusuf, Chapter #12, Verse #27) Qur’an.
So when he saw his shirt,- that it was torn at the back,- (her husband) said: “Behold! It is a snare of you women! truly, mighty is your snare! ( سورة يوسف , Yusuf, Chapter #12, Verse #28) Qur’an.
They saw that Nabi Yusuf’s , ‘Alayhi Salam, shirt was ripped form behind. Meaning that the wife of Al-Aziz was the one that tried to seduce him.
Can we gather that science is admissible as a form of evidence?
On the matter of 4 witnesses:
Rapists don’t usually perpetrate their crimes in public view. They seek to abduct women, take them to remote locations and the perform the act.
How then can 4 witnesses be produced in such a circumstance?
“
More than 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2
- 4 in 10 take place at the victim’s home.
“
https://rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
According to these statistics how can 4 witnesses be summoned, given their privacy, and especially considering that gags can be placed in the mouth to stop screaming?
Granted that women can make false rape claims in order to seek revenge on men and for other reasons.
This does not detract from the fact that most rapes occur in locations where the 4 witnesses criterion cannot be established.
Can semen samples be gathered and if they match those of the alleged perpetrator, at the very least, establish that there was some kind of sexual interaction, be it Zina or rape?
If semen samples are gathered and they match the DNA of the alleged perpetrator can this be used as evidence to convict him of Zina?
Some information regarding the matter:
http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/sexual_assault/edwards-medical_examinations_of_sexual_assault_victims.html
In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.
As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.
The capital punishment for the crime committed is very severe like the crime itself. Capital punishment is decreed by Divine law and its application must be carefully regulated to maintain the sanctity of the law. If capital punishment is not carefully regulated, it could be manipulated by human beings and the sanctity of the law will diminish. When capital punishment is applied and all doubts surrounding the crime are removed, it becomes clear that that the punishment is pure, unadulterated and fitting the severity of the crime. Such an attitude is in keeping with the sanctity of Divine law.
It is on the spirit of the foregoing that it is important to understand that the objective of Sharī`ah is not to apply capital punishment whenever possible; rather, it is to ward off such punishments even if it is due to a mere doubt.[1] Consider the following hadīth:
قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ادْرَءُوا الحُدُودَ عَنِ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ، فَإِنْ كَانَ لَهُ مَخْرَجٌ فَخَلُّوا سَبِيلَهُ، فَإِنَّ الإِمَامَ أَنْ يُخْطِئَ فِي العَفْوِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَنْ يُخْطِئَ فِي العُقُوبَةِ
The Messenger of Allāh (sallalāhu `alayhi wa sallam) said: “Avert the legal penalties from the Muslims as much as possible, if he has a way out then leave him to his way, for if the Imam (i.e. Judge) makes a mistake in forgiving it, it would be better than making a mistake in punishment.”[2]
This does not mean that Sharī`ah disregards upholding justice, especially when there is overwhelming evidence against the offender. In the case of zinā, one must differentiate between the official and legal form of preventive punishment (known as hadd) used to deter the public from committing a similar crime and the disciplinary form of punishment (also known as ta`zīr)[3] used to deter that specific individual from committing a criminal act in the future. Since the former is the ultimate form of punishment stipulated by Sharī`ah, the conditions to apply such a punishment are very stringent as well.[4] As such, circumstantial evidence is not sufficient for indictment and punitive action at a level where one is charged with committing zinā without fulfilling the necessary criteria stipulated by Islamic law.[5] On the other hand, disciplinary punishment may be carried out if there is enough circumstantial evidence that proves one guilty of a personal offense.[6]
In summary, if a certain individual commits an act of rape or other forms of battery, he may be tried by Islamic courts and given due justice in accordance to Islamic law. Depending on the amount of evidence available, the criminal will be prosecuted and disciplinary action will be taken accordingly.
It goes without saying that the level of punishment stipulated through ta`zīr is less in degree as compared to a hadd even though both may contain forms of incapacitation; however, unlike a hadd, a ta`zīr may contain other forms of punishment such as rehabilitation, restoration, etc. per the discretion of the judicial authority.[7]
We would like to point out that the verse you have quoted may not be used to deduce the outcome you have provided for the following two reasons:
1) The verse makes no reference to establishing penal laws or applying hadd against an offended in such a case, especially when the eventual outcome was that Yūsuf (`alayhis salām) was imprisoned instead of the wife of al-Azīz.[8]
2) The verse stipulating the conditions of establishing a punishment for zinā are explicit[9] whereas the verse in reference may only be considered at most an inference based on implications of the verse. As such, it cannot be used against to circumvent the requirements laid out in the first verse.[10]
And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best
Bilal Mohammad
Student Darul Iftaa
New Jersey, USA
Checked and Approved by,
Mufti Ebrahim Desai.
[1] Fatāwā Dārul `Ulūm Zakariyyā, v. 4 p. 533, Zam Zam Publishers
[2] Tirmidhī, 1424, The Book of Legal Punishments
[3] [قال الحصكفي] وَشَرْعًا (تَأْدِيبٌ دُونَ الْحَدِّ)… (وَيَكُونُ بِهِ وَ) بِالْحَبْسِ وَ (بِالصَّفْعِ) عَلَى الْعُنُقِ (وَفَرْكِ الْأُذُنِ، وَبِالْكَلَامِ الْعَنِيفِ، وَبِنَظَرِ الْقَاضِي لَهُ بِوَجْهٍ عَبُوسٍ، وَشَتْمٍ غَيْرِ الْقَذْفِ)
[قال ابن عابدين] (قَوْلُهُ تَأْدِيبٌ دُونَ الْحَدِّ) الْفَرْقُ بَيْنَ الْحَدِّ وَالتَّعْزِيرِ أَنَّ الْحَدَّ مُقَدَّرٌ وَالتَّعْزِيرَ مُفَوَّضٌ إلَى رَأْيِ الْإِمَامِ، وَأَنَّ الْحَدَّ يُدْرَأُ بِالشُّبُهَاتِ وَالتَّعْزِيرَ يَجِبُ مَعَهَا، وَأَنَّ الْحَدَّ لَا يَجِبُ عَلَى الصَّبِيِّ وَالتَّعْزِيرَ شُرِعَ عَلَيْهِ… (قَوْلُهُ وَيَكُونُ) أَيْ التَّعْزِيرُ بِهِ: أَيْ بِالضَّرْبِ إلَخْ وَلَيْسَ مُرَادُهُ حَصْرَ أَنْوَاعِهِ فِيمَا ذَكَرَ كَمَا يُفِيدُهُ قَوْلُهُ الْآتِي وَيَكُونُ بِالنَّفْيِ عَنْ الْبَدَائِعِ. قُلْت: وَيَكُونُ أَيْضًا بِالتَّشْهِيرِ وَالتَّسْوِيدِ لِشَاهِدِ الزُّورِ كَمَا سَنَذْكُرُهُ آخِرَ الْبَابِ (قَوْلُهُ وَبِالصَّفْعِ) هُوَ أَنْ يَبْسُطَ الرَّجُلُ كَفَّهُ فَيَضْرِبُ بِهَا قَفَا الْإِنْسَانِ أَوْ بَدَنَهُ، فَإِذَا قَبَضَ كَفَّهُ ثُمَّ ضَرَبَهُ فَلَيْسَ بِصَفْعٍ بَلْ يُقَالُ ضَرَبَهُ بِجُمْعِ كَفِّهِ مِصْبَاحٌ
(رد المحتار علي الدر المختار، ج ٤، ص ٦٠، ايج ايم سعيد كمبني)
[4] [قال الحصكفي] (وَيَثْبُتُ بِشَهَادَةِ أَرْبَعَةٍ) رِجَالٍ (فِي مَجْلِسٍ وَاحِدٍ) فَلَوْ جَاءُوا مُتَفَرِّقِينَ حُدُّوا (بِ) لَفْظِ (الزِّنَا لَا) مُجَرَّدِ لَفْظِ (الْوَطْءِ وَالْجِمَاعِ) وَظَاهِرُ الدُّرَرِ أَنَّ مَا يُفِيدُ مَعْنَى الزِّنَا يَقُومُ مَقَامَهُ
[قال ابن عابدين] (قَوْلُهُ وَيَثْبُتُ) أَيْ الزِّنَا عِنْدَ الْقَاضِي، أَمَّا ثُبُوتُهُ فِي نَفْسِهِ فَبِإِيجَادِ الْإِنْسَانِ لَهُ؛ لِأَنَّهُ فِعْلٌ حِسِّيٌّ نَهْرٌ (قَوْلُهُ رِجَالٍ) ؛ لِأَنَّهُ لَا مَدْخَلَ لِشَهَادَةِ النِّسَاءِ فِي الْحُدُودِ، وَقَيَّدَ بِذَلِكَ مِنْ إدْخَالِ التَّاءِ فِي الْعَدَدِ كَمَا هُوَ الْوَاقِعُ فِي النُّصُوصِ (قَوْلُهُ فَلَوْ جَاءُوا مُتَفَرِّقِينَ حُدُّوا) أَيْ حَدَّ الْقَذْفِ، وَلَوْ جَاءُوا فُرَادَى وَقَعَدُوا مَقْعَدَ الشُّهُودِ وَقَامَ إلَى الْقَاضِي وَاحِدٌ بَعْدَ وَاحِدٍ قُبِلَتْ شَهَادَتُهُمْ، وَإِنْ كَانُوا خَارِجَ الْمَسْجِدِ حُدُّوا جَمِيعًا بَحْرٌ عَنْ الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ، وَعَبَّرَ بِالْمَسْجِدِ؛ لِأَنَّهُ مَحِلُّ جُلُوسِ الْقَاضِي يَعْنِي أَنَّ اجْتِمَاعَهُمْ يُعْتَبَرُ فِي مَجْلِسِ الْقَاضِي لَا خَارِجَهُ، فَلَوْ اجْتَمَعُوا خَارِجَهُ وَدَخَلُوا عَلَيْهِ وَاحِدًا بَعْدَ وَاحِدٍ فَهُمْ مُتَفَرِّقُونَ فَيُحَدُّونَ (قَوْلُهُ بِلَفْظِ الزِّنَا) مُتَعَلِّقٌ بِشَهَادَةِ، فَلَوْ شَهِدَ رَجُلَانِ أَنَّهُ زَنَى وَآخَرَانِ أَنَّهُ أَقَرَّ بِالزِّنَا لَمْ يُحَدَّ، وَلَا تُحَدُّ الشُّهُودُ أَيْضًا إلَّا إذَا شَهِدَ ثَلَاثَةٌ بِالزِّنَا وَالرَّابِعُ بِالْإِقْرَارِ بِهِ فَتُحَدُّ الثَّلَاثَةُ ظَهِيرِيَّةٌ؛ لِأَنَّ شَهَادَةَ الْوَاحِدِ بِالْإِقْرَارِ لَا تُعْتَبَرُ فَبَقِيَ كَلَامُ الثَّلَاثَةِ قَذْفًا بَحْرٌ (قَوْلُهُ لَا مُجَرَّدِ لَفْظِ الْوَطْءِ وَالْجِمَاعِ) ؛ لِأَنَّ لَفْظَ الزِّنَا هُوَ الدَّالُّ عَلَى فِعْلِ الْحَرَامِ دُونَهُمَا، فَلَوْ شَهِدُوا أَنَّهُ وَطِئَهَا وَطْئًا مُحَرَّمًا لَا يَثْبُتُ بَحْرٌ: أَيْ إلَّا إذَا قَالَ وَطْئًا هُوَ زِنًا.
(رد المحتار علي الدر المختار، ج ٤، ص ٧، ايج ايم سعيد كمبني)
[5] Kitābul Fatāwā, v. 5 p. 179, Zam Zam Publishers;
Fatāwā Dārul `Ulūm Zakariyyā, v. 4 p. 533, Zam Zam Publishers;
[6] Fatāwā Uthmānī, v. 3 p. 538, Maktabah Ma`āriful Qur’ān;
Fatāwā Haqqāniyyah, v. 5 p. 195, Jāmi`ah Dārul Ulūm Haqqāniyyah;
[قال الحصكفي] (وَعُزِّرَ كُلُّ مُرْتَكِبِ مُنْكَرٍ أَوْ مُؤْذِي مُسْلِمٍ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ بِقَوْلٍ أَوْ فِعْلٍ) إلَّا إذَا كَانَ الْكَذِبُ ظَاهِرًا كَيَا كَلْبُ بَحْرٌ (وَلَوْ بِغَمْزِ الْعَيْنِ) أَوْ إشَارَةِ الْيَدِ لِأَنَّهُ غِيبَةٌ كَمَا يَأْتِي فِي الْحَظْرِ، فَمُرْتَكِبُهُ مُرْتَكِبُ مُحَرَّمٍ وَكُلُّ مُرْتَكِبِ مَعْصِيَةٍ لَا حَدَّ فِيهَا، فِيهَا التَّعْزِيرُ أَشْبَاهٌ (فَيُعَزَّرُ) بِشَتْمِ وَلَدِهِ وَقَذْفِهِ وَ (بِقَذْفِ مَمْلُوكٍ) وَلَوْ أُمَّ وَلَدِهِ (وَكَذَا بِقَذْفِ كَافِرٍ) وَكُلِّ مَنْ لَيْسَ بِمُحْصَنٍ (بِزِنًا) وَيَبْلُغُ بِهِ غَايَتَهُ، كَمَا لَوْ أَصَابَ مِنْ أَجْنَبِيَّةٍ مُحَرَّمًا غَيْرَ جِمَاعٍ
[قال ابن عابدين] (قَوْلُهُ وَكُلُّ مُرْتَكِبِ مَعْصِيَةٍ) لَعَلَّهُ ذَكَرَهُ مَعَ إغْنَاءِ مَا قَبْلَهُ عَنْهُ لِيُفِيدَ أَنَّ الْمُرَادَ بِالْمُنْكَرِ مَا لَا حَدَّ فِيهِ.
قَالَ فِي الْفَتْحِ: وَيُعَزَّرُ مَنْ شَهِدَ شُرْبَ الشَّارِبِينَ وَالْمُجْتَمِعُونَ عَلَى شِبْهِ الشُّرْبِ وَإِنْ لَمْ يَشْرَبُوا، وَمَنْ مَعَهُ رِكْوَةُ خَمْرٍ وَالْمُفْطِرُ فِي رَمَضَانَ يُعَزَّرُ وَيُحْبَسُ، وَكَذَا الْمُسْلِمُ يَبِيعُ الْخَمْرَ وَيَأْكُلُ الرِّبَا. وَالْمُغَنِّي، وَالْمُخَنَّثُ، وَالنَّائِحَةُ يُعَزَّرُونَ وَيُحْبَسُونَ حَتَّى يُحْدِثُوا تَوْبَةً، وَمَنْ يُتَّهَمُ بِالْقَتْلِ وَالسَّرِقَةِ يُحْبَسُ وَيُخَلَّدُ فِي السِّجْنِ إلَى أَنْ يُظْهِرَ التَّوْبَةَ، وَكَذَا مَنْ قَبَّلَ أَجْنَبِيَّةً أَوْ عَانَقَهَا أَوْ مَسَّهَا بِشَهْوَةٍ. اهـ.
(رد المحتار علي الدر المختار، ج ٤، ص ٦٧، ايج ايم سعيد كمبني)
[7] See footnote 3.
[8] Surah Yūsuf: 33-35
[9] Surah Nūr: 4
[10] وَإِيجَابُ الرَّجْمِ عَلَى غَيْرِ مَاعِزٍ فَإِنَّهُ رُوِيَ أَنَّ مَاعِزًا زَنَى وَهُوَ مُحْصَنٌ فَرُجِمَ وَمَعْلُومٌ أَنَّهُ لَمْ يُرْجَمْ لِأَنَّهُ مَاعِزٌ وَصَحَابِيٌّ بَلْ لِأَنَّهُ زَنَى فِي حَالَةِ الْإِحْصَانِ فَيَثْبُتُ هَذَا الْحُكْمُ فِي حَقِّ غَيْرِهِ بِدَلَالَةِ النَّصِّ.
قَوْلُهُ (وَلَمْ يَجُزْ بِالْقِيَاسِ) إثْبَاتُ الْحُدُودِ وَالْكَفَّارَاتِ بِالْقِيَاسِ لَا يَجُوزُ عِنْدَنَا وَعِنْدَ الشَّافِعِيِّ – رَحِمَهُ اللَّهُ – يَجُوزُ؛ لِأَنَّ الْقِيَاسَ مِنْ دَلَائِلِ الشَّرْعِ فَيَجُوزُ أَنْ يَثْبُتَ بِهِ الْحُدُودُ وَالْكَفَّارَاتُ كَمَا يَثْبُتُ بِالْكِتَابِ وَالسُّنَّةِ.
وَلِأَنَّ الدَّلَائِلَ الَّتِي قَامَتْ عَلَى صِحَّةِ الْقِيَاسِ لَا تَفْصِلُ بَيْنَ مَوْضِعٍ وَمَوْضِعٍ فَصَحَّ اسْتِعْمَالُهُ فِي كُلِّ مَوْضِعٍ إلَى أَنْ يَمْنَعَ مَانِعٌ وَلَمْ يُوجَدْ.
وَلَنَا أَنَّ الْكَفَّارَاتِ شُرِعَتْ مَاحِيَةً لِلْآثَامِ الْحَاصِلَةِ بِارْتِكَابِ أَسْبَابِهَا وَفِيهَا مَعْنَى الْعُقُوبَةِ وَالزَّجْرِ أَيْضًا لِمَا عُرِفَ، وَكَذَا الْحُدُودُ شُرِعَتْ عُقُوبَةً وَجَزَاءً عَلَى الْجِنَايَاتِ الَّتِي هِيَ أَسْبَابُهَا وَفِيهَا مَعْنَى الطُّهْرَةِ أَيْضًا بِشَهَادَةِ صَاحِبِ الشَّرْعِ وَلَا مَدْخَلَ لِلرَّأْيِ فِي مَعْرِفَةِ مَقَادِيرِ الْأَجْرَامِ وَآثَامِهَا وَمَعْرِفَةُ مَا يَحْصُلُ بِهِ إزَالَةُ آثَامِهَا وَمَعْرِفَةُ مَا يَصْلُحُ جَزَاءً لَهَا وَزَاجِرًا عَنْهَا وَمَقَادِيرُ ذَلِكَ فَلَا يُمْكِنُ إثْبَاتُهَا بِالْقِيَاسِ الَّذِي مَبْنَاهُ عَلَى الرَّأْيِ.
بِخِلَافِ الِاسْتِدْلَالِ فَإِنَّ مَبْنَاهُ عَلَى الْمَعْنَى الَّذِي تَضَمَّنَهُ النَّصُّ لُغَةً فَيَكُونُ مُضَافًا إلَى الشَّرْعِ. وَلِأَنَّ الْحُدُودَ مِمَّا يَنْدَرِئُ بِالشُّبُهَاتِ فَلَا يَجُوزُ إثْبَاتُهَا بِالْقِيَاسِ الَّذِي فِيهِ شُبْهَةٌ بِخِلَافِ الِاسْتِدْلَالِ؛ لِأَنَّ الْمَعْنَى الَّذِي تَعَلَّقَ الْحُكْمُ بِهِ لَمَّا صَارَ مُضَافًا إلَى الشَّرْعِ انْتَفَتْ عَنْهُ الشُّبْهَةُ فَيَجُوزُ إثْبَاتُهَا بِهِ.
(كشف الأسرار، ج ٢، ص ٢٢١، دار الكتاب الإسلامي)