Ramadan Mubarak!I pray that we get the full blessings of Ramadan and may Allah (SWT) grant us more blessings in the year to come.Amin Summa Amin.Ramadan Kareem,
Started by Fulanizzle, September 11, 2002, 01:44:16 AM
0 Members and 17 Guests are viewing this topic.
QuoteSalamu alaikum wa rahmatullah Tala wa barkatu------------------------------------------------------- ?Alot has been going round about Amina Lawal...There is a lot to that issue..but what puzzles me most is that whyyyyyy in the world would there be any ?argument ?or doubt ?if the man is the father ?of Amina's child. ???? ??? ??? !!!!!!!!!!!!!HELLOOOOOO we are in like what?? ? the year 2002.........right..... and there is a little something we call a BLOOD TEST!!! The child is there, the mother is there, and an accused man is there and let the blood tests begin... ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)And personally, i dont think this story ?is as big as Safiya's case... but i have a feeling a guilty man is being laid off so easily....but only Allah Subhana wa ta'ala knows....Oh, and here is a lesson for yall ?girls out there....."See, a man can get away with it and but the girl is being left behind pregnant ?and ?there is just no way to run from it and ofcourse the destruction of the girl's life proceeds.... :o :o :o :o :o :o :oLESSON: Mata kama kan ku sosai!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-XMay Allah be with us all; girls and boys, ladies and men...and guide us the right way.....Insha Allah Amin.... :D :D :D" ?
QuoteFulaniciousSure there are things like blood tests, although a genetic fingerprinting using DNA would be more accurate (but the State cannot afford it). However, that is not the issue. Amina admitted to having committed the act. The FACT that she gave birth to baby means SOMEONE also is responsible. This is enough to establish that SOMETHING had indeed taken place. However, for her to be punished, 4 WITNESSES must have seen the act DURING COMMISSION, not AFTER! So she is NOT GUILTY at all. For her to be punished, her guilt must be established DE JEURE, not DE FACTO.Abdalla
QuoteMany thanks,interesting discussion,particularly the comment by Ali Magashi.It is interesting that only those who wish to convict a suspect are "knowledgeable" about Islamic Law but not those who obey the prophetic injunction to seek relief for Muslims wherever they may be from the hadd.I have made the argument again and again and I stand to be corrected.In Maliki law a child born to a divorcee within 5 years of divorce belongs to the husband unless he denies it. It stands to reason that a child presumed to be a legitimate offspring of marriage cannot at the same time be the evidence for fornication.There is no record that Amina's husband rejected the child.There is no source in shariah that gives anyone the right to interrogate a woman in Amina's situation about the source of her pregnancy-innocence is presumed. So her "confession" on this ultra vires interrogation is meaningless and to no legal effect.The only other way she could be convicted is through 4 eye witnesses who do not exist.The state had no case from the beginning, the judge had no right to entertain it and those who brought the charge should be tried for slander.This is Islamic law. It is not enough to denounce application of rationality to law and indeed not proper because it suggests that thge law is contrary to logic and common intelliegence wal iyadhu billah.In any case we never learn. The issue of safiya was so flogged with abuses and insults and in the end the Appeal court ruled that the judge was in error on many counts of law and procedure.In Amina's case, the surprise to me is that the appeal judge said she had no right to withdraw her confession. Every student of elementary islamic law knows that in matters of hadd-except the hadd of qadhf or slander- a Muslim is free to withdraw confession at any time including during punishment. In the case of zina the text of the mukhtasar is explicit- "zina can be established by a confession once, except if withdrawn in any manner or if the confessor runs away even if during hadd." this is the text of the mukhtasar.At the end of the day those who judge their piety by the number of hands amputated and women stoned will do what they like.Al that we can do is say it and say it again that this is not Allah's law.I challenge anyone to give me a source-no matter how weak, for asking a divorcee who delivers within gestation the source of her pregnancy. Over to those who are experts in Islamic law!On the contrary when a man came to Umar to report an unmarried woman who was pregnant 'Umar chased him away- and this is in the Musannaf of Abdul Razzaq.After the sokoto jihad it was 100 years before the white man came. In that century only one woman was stoned for adultery and she had reported herself repeatedly to Sutan Bello. He asked her to go and deliver, then go and wean etc exactly as the prophet did with the ghamidite.For us however we started shariah two years ago and have already sentenced 5 people to rajm and amputated God knows how many arms. Is this evidence of Shariah or lack of it?I apologise if I offend any sensibilities but I have a little time on my hands so I went into detail.Sanusi
Page created in 0.245 seconds with 21 queries.