In the following video, you’ll see a young man executed for making war against the Islamic State. His crime was to attack the IS with an RPG, so he is being executed by RPG. As the translator points out, this summary punishment is administered according to the sharia doctrine of qisas, the Islamic version of “an eye for an eye”.
The biblical doctrine of “an eye for an eye” was actually an important advance in the development of the rule of law: it was instituted as a limitation on retributive justice. Its adoption prevented those seeking retaliation from exacting a punishment in excess of the original crime.
Somehow, I don’t think that’s the spirit in which these ISIS mujahideen administered this particular instance of qisas. Their augmented firing squad was simply their indulgence of a penchant for gore and mayhem, and also an opportunity to strike terror into the hearts of the infidels via the resulting propaganda video.
Many thanks to ritamalik for the translation, and to Vlad Tepes for the subtitling. WARNING: Although not as graphic as most ISIS videos, this clip does depict violent death, and shows the corpse of the victim. Viewer discretion is advised:
To understand the Islamic doctrine of qisas, or retaliation, it is recommended that readers study section o3.0 of Book O, “Justice”, in ’Umdat al-salik wa ’uddat al-nasik, or The reliance of the traveller and tools of the worshipper, which is commonly referred to as Reliance of the Traveller when cited in English. Reliance is an authoritative source on Sunni Islamic law, because it is certified as such by Al-Azhar University in Cairo.
For those who are interested, the complete text of Chapter O3.0, “Retaliation for Bodily Injury or Death (Qisas)”, is below the jump. Pay special attention to this provision (O3.4):
It is not permissible to exact retaliation against someone without the presence of the caliph… or his representative… If someone takes retaliation without the caliph’s permission, then it is valid… but the person who took it is disciplined… for arrogating the caliph’s prerogative, since administering retaliation is one of his functions, and to encroach upon it is wrong.
From this we may conclude that (1) Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi designated the commander shown in this video as his representative, or (2) the commander acted outside his authority, and will be punished accordingly. In the latter case, however, the punishment against the executed man is still considered valid and just, since it was carried out in full compliance with Islamic law.
The full text of o3.0 (emphasis added):
Continue reading →