A Deliberation on Punishment for Pederasty: Legal-Judicial Analysis of Article 110 of Iranian Civil Law
Journal Title: فقه و اصول - Year 2012, Vol 44, Issue 88
Abstract
Despite the challenges noticed in the meaning and concept of pederasty (lawāṭ), different viewpoints have always existed among the jurists concerning the punishment of the pederast, to the extent that some jurists have decreed death penalty equally for both the married and unmarried pederast. In contrast, some others have reconciled among the related traditions in this respect and considered the same punishment for pederasty as the one for adultery and have distinguished between the married and the unmarried pederast. Quoting various opinions as well as analyzing the evidences derived from traditions concerning the punishment of the pederast, the present article considers as constrainable the absoluteness of the traditions referred to by the jurists who believe in the equal punishment for the married and unmarried pederast and maintains that the exigency of the reconciliation among the traditions is that the pederast, in case of being married, is sentenced to death and if unmarried is sentenced to lashes. Of course, as for pederasty in case of non-penetration (ghayr īqāb), several views are recognizable in Imāmiya jurisprudence, as the generally accepted view has considered lashes and some jurists like Shaykh Ṭūsī in Al-Nihāya have decreed lapidation for the married man and lashes for the unmarried man. The Islamic penal law, on the basis of some traditions, has simply considered death penalty as the punishment for pederasty in case of penetration. Examining the objections made against the lawmaker’s definition of pederasty, the present research analyzes article 110 of Iranian Civil Law and tries to criticize the lawmaker’s legislative function besides analyzing the lawmaker’s basis in establishing punishment for pederasty
Authors and Affiliations
Hamid MasjidsarāI
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP183267
- DOI 10.22067/fiqh.v0i0.12920
- Views 125
- Downloads 0
An exploration into the debates over hadd and ta‘zīr
The essential difference between hadd and ta‘zīr has long been accepted in Islamic penal system. Based on a study of the holy texts and the statements of the scholars it can be asserted that the rule according to which ‘...
Collective beneficence (collective good) an its role in civil liability
Beneficence as a principle is one of the definite jurisprudential rules and a disclaimer of civil liability of the individual in terms of the loss enforced upon others during acts of collective good. This shall necessita...
The Impact of Obligation to Assignment of Ownership (Tamlīk) in Imāmī Jurisprudence and Iranian Law
In ordinary cases, the object of transaction in such contracts as sale (bay‘) and lease (ijāra) has financcial value like property (‘ayn) or profit, or physical action. However, whether obligation to performing an action...
A study into annulment (iqālah) from the perspective of Shiite jurisprudence and law
Annulment is one of the institutions of contract cancellation in Shiite jurisprudence and law. One of the primary questions about every phenomenon is the question of the nature and character. Although traditionally Shiit...
Proportion of Ordinance and Subject: Functions and Mechanism of Recognition in the Jurists’ Expression
One of the requisites for proper understanding of the legal statutes (nuṣūṣ) is that the legislator and the jurist, along with other wise people in various scenes of life, should enjoy collective wisdom and, besides havi...