-
Can Requirement Of 4 Witnesses In Adultery Be Fulfilled By A Video?
Is it correct to say if we have video of someone committing zina the punishment can be given to them? Because the four witnesses thing is for making sure it occurred right?
-
19 Replies
-
Can Requirement Of 4 Witnesses In Adultery Be Fulfilled By A Video?
updated 2 years, 5 months ago
5 Members
·
19
Replies
-
The crime is not proven any more with four witnesses than it would be with three witnesses. The point in four witnesses is to establish that the practice is committed on a regular basis – as in a prostitution house. If that could be reliably established through some other means than that should fulfill the legal requirement of evidence. It would still be up to the judge to admit or dismiss any submitted evidence based on other factors.
-
In case of open adultery, (e.g. like in a brothel on a regular basis etc.) or in case a person is known to have a lewd character or loose character, all kind of evidence would be admissible including circumstantial and medical evidence etc. (it could include video tapes as well). It comes down to a judge to decide which evidence is appropriate in the given circumstances.
However, in case of an accusation made on a chaste man or woman who has had a very good repute in the society and is not known to be involved in any such activity in the past, four (4) eye-witnesses is a must requirement to initiate the proceedings, otherwise there will not be any case against the accused, as Ghamidi Sahab writes:
…”the law of Islam is that the accuser shall have to produce four witnesses. Anything less than this will not prove his accusation. Mere circumstantial evidence or mere medical examination in this case are absolutely of no importance. If a person is of lewd and loose character, such things have a very important role, but if he has a morally sound reputation, Islam wants that even if he has faltered, his crime should be concealed and he should not be disgraced in the society. Consequently, in this case, it wants four eye-witnesses for the testimony to initiate the hearing, and if the accuser fails to produce them, it regards him as guilty of qadhf“….
-
But video taping is not less than four witnesses- it is more right?
-
This is not about nature of evidence, it has more to do with protection of a chaste man’s / woman’s repute. That is why four eye-witnesses is an absolute condition and is not subject to any variation.
-
This is Ghamidi sahabs interpretation. I don’t see why we should do this. They have committed a crime that could potentially harm society. Why should we find ang way to prosecute them?
-
Sure! you’ve every right to believe in the interpretation you find more logical.
This directive has a great wisdom behind it, it provides a perfect balance in the society and creates a deterrence for both parties (accuser and the accused) so that they may not create useless chaos and anarchy in the society based on mere envy, jealousy etc.
-
But if they have a video tape this is not mere jealousy. Why are they being punished- for doing such an act in public. Them making a video is the same as doing it in public nowadays
-
This is protecting both the chaste and demanding the accuser to be extremely responsible in what he is about to do.
-
So if he has a video he’s being responsible right? He has perfect evidence
-
If he/she is a chaste man/woman, they would still be protected against such accusation and such evidence.
-
Why- it has been proven that they have committed the crime. The goal at the end of the day is to stop zina. If someone admits or it has been proven that they have done zina in any way to begin reasonable doubt (as long as it’s more than four witnesses) then what’s the problem?
-
I just told you the problem. Your video evidence actually kills the purpose which verses of Quran have used specifically by using words “chaste” with them. Four human eye-witnesses are must for even consideration of any such accusation, otherwise one should get ready for Qadhf.
-
Ok I guess we could say what’s the difference between three or four so it seems it’s a requirement.
-
But I still don’t get it. What if the video was seen by four people? It is just like doing the act in public with the internet nowadays
-
Such kind of act is not something expected from a chaste person, for these kind of acts, the application of these verses would not be appropriate. If someone is doing something so publicly, then there is no need to even file a complaint, the sate can take action on its own.
What I am discussing is a specific case, in which a person with a good repute (both moral and social) is being accused of such act, in such a case the accuser will be required to produce four eye-witnesses (<i style=”font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit;”>despite the fact accuser claims he has a secret recording or some other evidence), in that case, such evidence will not be considered.
These are both different scenarios.
-
-
If the act was video recorded by one live witness, then it is only one live witness. Other Individuals watching the video later on are not live witnesses. Little that I know, in my opinion, making videos of such an act spreads Fahaashi in the society. Pornography is a far shameful crime than zina and it’s punishment should be severe as well. The other day I saw a video clip ( Ilm-o-Hikmat) on YouTube, where Ghamidi Saheb responded to query about the punishment for rape. In his opinion rape is considered as Fasad-fil-Ardh, and the punishment for fasad-fil-ardh in Quran depending on the severity and nature of crime is eviction from city, amputation of opposite arm and leg or crucification. May Allah forgive us and protect us from all evil.
-
Please also refer to the video below from 24:40 to 27:19
-
Like it sounds a little illogical. Like yes Islam wants that these things shouldn’t be spread. But if a case is proven by a video and judge doesn’t get any way to reject the video, then having clear evidence and still not giving the punishment? How?
-
Please read:
-
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
