664
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
PEACE IN RETRIBUTION AND ITS RULINGS IN HANAFI JURISPRUDENCE
Abdul Zahir Ershad
Master's Student in Criminal Law and Criminology, Faculty of Law and Political Science,
Jami University, Herat, Afghanistan
zahirershad61@gamial.com
Abdul Khaliq Haqani
Faculty of Sharia and Islamic Studies, Jami University, Herat, Afghanistan
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17688079
Abstract.
Retribution (Qiṣāṣ) constitutes one of the most significant enforcement
guarantees within Islamic criminal law, playing a fundamental role in ensuring justice and
deterring crimes against the bodily integrity of individuals. Nevertheless, in order to safeguard
social interests and to promote the spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation, Islam has introduced
the institution of Sulh (amicable settlement) alongside Qiṣāṣ. Within Hanafi jurisprudence, Sulh
in the context of Qiṣāṣ Is recognized as a legitimate mechanism for ending disputes and
preventing the continuation of hostility, with specific legal provisions governing its application.
Hanafi jurists, relying on Qur’anic verses and Prophetic traditions, consider Sulh in
Qiṣāṣ not only permissible but, In certain cases, recommended and commendable; thus, the legal
heirs of the victim (wali al-dam) may pardon the offender either In exchange for compensation
(diya) or gratuitously. This study examines the concept of Sulh in Qiṣāṣ, analyzing its validity
requirements and legal consequences under Hanafi jurisprudence, and demonstrates that this
institution can play an effective role in achieving restorative justice and mitigating social harms.
Furthermore, a comparative overview of Hanafi perspectives with those of other Islamic schools
of law Is presented, thereby highlighting the significance of this subject within the framework of
Islamic legal thought
.
Keywords
: Sulh, Qiṣāṣ, pardon, Hanafi jurisprudence, diya, wali al-dam, Islamic
criminal law.
Introduction
Islam, as a comprehensive religion, while emphasizing the implementation of justice, has
also introduced mechanisms for forgiveness, reconciliation, and reform. One such mechanism is
Sulh (amicable settlement) in Qiṣāṣ (retribution), whereby the legal heirs of the victim (awliyāʾ
al-dam) reach a settlement with the offender instead of executing retribution. This institution
holds particular significance in reducing retaliatory violence and fostering social stability.
Qiṣāṣ, as one of the most important penal provisions of Islamic law, was legislated on the
basis of justice and the protection of both individual and social rights. This legal institution not
only addresses crimes against life and bodily integrity but also primarily serves the purposes of
deterrence, relieving the suffering of the victim’s heirs, and ensuring social order (Jawadi Amuli,
2016, p. 340). Alongside this, the divine legislator, by enacting Sulh and forgiveness in the
context of Qiṣāṣ, has emphasized the ethical and humanitarian dimensions of punishment.
Hence, Sulh in Qiṣāṣ is not only permissible but, in many cases, encouraged and recommended.
As stated in the Holy Qur’an: “But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it is an
expiation for him” (al-Baqara: 178), which affirms the permissibility and desirability of
forgiveness and reconciliation.
Hanafi jurisprudence, relying on its four primary sources—Qur’an, Sunnah, consensus
(ijmāʿ), and analogical reasoning (qiyāṣ)—has examined Sulh in Qiṣāṣ as a legitimate matter
665
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
subject to specific legal rulings. According to this school of law, reconciliation may take
different forms, such as unconditional pardon, pardon conditioned on diya (blood money) or
compensation, or settlement involving material benefits and interests (al-Sarakhsī, 1421 AH, vol.
10, p. 165). A distinctive feature of Hanafi jurisprudence in this regard is its emphasis on
safeguarding social welfare and preventing further corruption and bloodshed within society;
accordingly, in certain instances, it prefers reconciliation over the implementation of retribution.
From a legal perspective, the institution of Sulh in cases involving crimes against life has
also been incorporated into the penal codes of several Islamic countries. Notably, in
Afghanistan—where the legal system is heavily influenced by Hanafi jurisprudence—Sulh in
Qiṣāṣ has been granted legal recognition and is promoted with a restorative orientation
(Afghanistan Penal Code, 2017, Article 576).
In this light, the examination of the rulings and conditions of Sulh in Qiṣāṣ under Hanafi
jurisprudence plays a crucial role in clarifying the approach of this legal school toward criminal
justice and its interaction with humanitarian and ethical perspectives.
1- Conceptualization
1-1- Qisas (Retaliation
)
The term Qisas in its linguistic sense denotes pursuit and prosecution (Ibn Manzur, 1414
AH). In Islamic jurisprudential terminology, Qisas refers to punishing the offender in the same
manner as the crime committed, provided that the conditions and limitations stipulated are duly
observed (Sarakhsi, 1421 AH). The Hanafi jurists have regarded Qisas as one of the instruments
for achieving justice and preserving social life, which is legitimized as the right of the heirs of
the victim following homicide or bodily injury (Kasani, 1406 AH).
2-1- Sulh (Reconciliation/Settlement)
Sulh, in its linguistic sense, means the removal of conflict and the establishment of peace
between the disputing parties (Raghib Isfahani, 1412 AH). In jurisprudential terminology, Sulh is
an agreement concluded between two parties to end a dispute, and in the context of Qisas, it
refers to the waiver of the right of retaliation by the heirs of the victim in exchange for
compensation or without compensation (Ibn Abidin, 1412 AH).
1. Legitimacy of Sulh in Qisas in Hanafi Jurisprudence
Hanafi jurisprudence, relying on the Qur’an, Sunnah, and Qiyas, recognizes the
legitimacy of Sulh in matters of Qisas. Sarakhsi states: “al-Sulh ja’iz fi al-Qisas, sawa’un kana
‘ala mal aw bighayri mal” (Settlement is permissible in Qisas, whether with compensation or
without it) (al-Mabsut, Vol. 26, p. 85). Likewise, in Bada’iʿ al-Sana’iʿ it is noted that Sulh in
Qisas is analogous to sale when it involves compensation, and is akin to pardon when it is
without compensation.
2. Types of Sulh in Qisas
a) Sulh with compensation (ʿiwad): In this situation, the heirs of the victim relinquish
Qisas in return for monetary compensation. Under Hanafi jurisprudence, this type of Sulh carries
the legal ruling of a contract of sale (Kasani, Bada’iʿ al-Sana’iʿ, Vol. 7, p. 238).
b) Sulh without compensation: In this situation, the heirs of the victim forgive the
offender without receiving any compensation. This type of Sulh is considered equivalent to a gift
(hiba) or an absolute pardon (Ibn Abidin, Radd al-Muhtar, Vol. 6, p. 293).
3-1- Conditions for the Validity of Sulh in Qisas
1.
Majority and maturity of the heir of the victim (wali al-dam).
666
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
2.
Legal capacity of the offender (jāni) to provide compensation (in the case of settlement
with consideration).
3.
Consent of both parties.
4.
Determination and clarity of the amount of compensation in financial settlement.
5.
Absence of coercion or deception in the contract (al-Hindi, al-Fatawa al-ʿAlamgiriyya,
Vol. 3, p. 355).
6. Effects of Sulh in Qisas
7. Extinguishment of the right of retaliation: by the conclusion of Sulh, the right of Qisas
is extinguished, and the offender is released from punishment.
8. Binding nature of the settlement: Sulh is a binding contract (ʿaqd lāzim) and, once
concluded, withdrawal from it is impermissible.
9. Preservation or extinguishment of the right to diyyah (blood money): if the Sulh is
without consideration, the right to diyyah is also extinguished unless otherwise specifically
agreed upon.
10. Effect of settlement by some heirs of the victim: if some heirs enter into Sulh while
others demand Qisas, the right of Qisas remains enforceable proportionate to the shares of the
remaining heirs.
11. Status of a minor’s guardian in Sulh concerning Qisas: the guardian of a minor (father
or executor) may not conclude Sulh on behalf of the minor unless it Is in the minor’s best
interest. In such cases, the authorization of a judge is required. If the settlement serves the
interest of the minor, it is deemed permissible (Ibn Humam, Fath al-Qadir, Vol. 7, p. 201).
12. Comparison with Other Schools of Jurisprudence
Shafi‘I jurisprudence: recognizes Sulh in Qisas with compensation, but the compensation
must equal or be less than the diyyah.
Maliki jurisprudence: prefers Sulh, but jurists differ over permitting compensation in
excess of the diyyah. Imami (Shi‘a) jurisprudence: allows Sulh both with and without
compensation, but stipulates specific conditions regarding the consent of the offender and the
heirs of the victim.
13. Societal and Governmental Role of Sulh in Qisas
In many countries influenced by Islamic jurisprudence (such as Afghanistan and
Pakistan), Sulh in Qisas serves as a mechanism to prevent tribal and familial conflicts. The
Islamic judge (hakim al-sharʿ) may also play the role of mediator in such cases to prevent
bloodshed.
14. Jurisprudential-Social Analysis of Sulh in Qisas
Sulh in Qisas represents a moral and rational solution that accords with the principles of
justice while simultaneously preventing the escalation of hostilities. Hanafi jurisprudence,
through its flexible rulings on settlement, has provided the necessary framework for the
application of this legal instrument.
2- Qur’anic and Hadith Background of Sulh in Qisas
In the Holy Qur’an, the permissibility of reconciliation (Sulh) in Qisas is explicitly stated:
«
ناَسْحِإِب ِهْيَلِإ ٌءاَدَأ َو ِفو ُرْعَمْلاِب ٌعاَبِ تاَف ٌءْيَش ِهي ِخَأ ْنِم ُهَل َيِفُع ْنَمَف
»
(Sūrat al-Baqarah, 2:178)
“But if any remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable
demand, and compensate him with handsome gratitude.”
This verse demonstrates that while Islamic law recognizes the right of Qisas, pardon and
reconciliation are regarded as superior and recommended.
667
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
The use of the passive verb ʿufiya (“is forgiven”) highlights the voluntary nature of
pardon (Ṭabāṭabāʾī, 1417 AH). Many exegetes, including Fakhr al-Rāzī (1420 AH), have
emphasized that this verse confirms the fundamental legitimacy of Sulh in cases of intentional
homicide.
On the other hand, the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) said in a hadith:
«
ْعٱ
ْمُكنَع ُ هللَّٱ ُفْعَي اوُف
»
(al-Bukhārī, 1400 AH)
“Forgive, and Allah will forgive you.”
This hadith provides an ethical reinforcement of the role of forgiveness and settlement in
social relations, and it has been cited by jurists as evidence of the moral significance of Sulh,
even in the context of implementing hudūd (fixed punishments under Shariʿah).
3- General Overview of the Hanafi School on Sulh in Qisas
The Hanafi school of jurisprudence regards Sulh (settlement) in Qisas not only as
permissible but, in many cases, as recommended (mustaḥabb), since it preserves lives, reduces
acts of vengeance, and strengthens social cohesion. According to al-Sarakhsi (1421 AH), if the
heir of the victim (walī al-dam) reconciles with the offender, the right of Qisas is extinguished
and replaced with compensation (diyyah or other property), provided that the settlement is
concluded with full consent. Likewise, Hanafi jurists consider settlement for more or less than
the standard diyyah valid, on the condition that it does not involve uncertainty (gharar) or
deception (al-Kasani, 1406 AH).
Thus, it is concluded that the concept of Qisas and Sulh in Islamic jurisprudence reflects
Qisas as just retaliation and retribution for crime, whose legitimacy is explicitly affirmed in verse
178 of Sūrat al-Baqarah. At the same time, Islam also recognizes the possibility of pardon and
reconciliation in the same verse:
«
َيِفُع ْنَمَف ... ىَلْتَقْلٱ يِف ُصاَصِقْلٱ ُمُكْيَلَع َبِتُك اوُنَمآ َنيِذهلٱ اَهُّيَأ اَي
ْن ِم ُهَل
َأ
ٌءْيَش ِهي ِخ
ِ تٱَف
ْيَلِإ ٌءآَدَأ َو ِفو ُرْعَمْلٱِب ٌٌۢعاَب
ِه
نٰـَسْحِإِب
»
(al-Qur’ān, al-Baqarah: 178)
“O you who believe! Prescribed for you is retaliation in cases of murder … But if any
remission is made by the brother of the slain, then grant any reasonable demand, and compensate
him with handsome gratitude.” In Islamic jurisprudence, Sulh in Qisas is thus recognized as a
valid Sharīʿah-based contract, which may be concluded either with consideration (financial
compensation) or without it.
4-
The Hanafi School’s Perspective on Sulh in Qisas
1-4- Legitimacy of Sulh in Qisas in Hanafi Jurisprudence
Hanafi jurists, relying on verse 178 of Sūrat al-Baqarah, affirm the legitimacy of Sulh in
Qisas. They hold that the right of retaliation belongs to the heir of the victim (walī al-dam), who
may relinquish this right either gratuitously or in exchange for specified property (al-Sarakhsi,
1421 AH, Vol. 10, p. 165). Furthermore, the Prophet (peace be upon him) stated:
«
ٌليِتَق ُهَل َلِتُق ْنَم
ِإ ،ِنْي َرَظهنلا ِرْيَخِب َوُهَف
ُهُلِتاَق َلَتْقُي ْوَأ ،َةَيِ دلا ىَطْعُي ْنَأ اهم
»
(al-Bukhārī, 1400 AH, ḥadīth no. 6891)
“Whoever has his relative killed has two options: either he is given the blood-money
(diyyah), or the killer is executed.”
The Hanafis consider this hadith as the basis for granting the heir of the victim the
authority to choose pardon or reconciliation.
2-4- Types of Sulh in Qisas According to Hanafi Jurisprudence
The Hanafi school classifies Sulh in Qisas into two principal categories:
1-2-4- Gratuitous Settlement (Pardon without Compensation
)
668
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
In this case, the heir of the victim waives the right of Qisas without receiving any
compensation. This form of pardon is considered mustaḥabb (recommended) and results in the
extinction of the right of retaliation. Hanafis believe that such pardon entails great divine reward
and may serve as a means of reconciliation between disputing parties (al-Kasani, 1406 AH, Vol.
7, p. 267).
2-2-4- Compensated Settlement (Sulh with Consideration)
The heir of the victim may waive the right of Qisas in return for receiving diyyah or other
property. Unlike certain other schools of jurisprudence, Hanafi law permits Sulh for more or less
than the standard diyyah, provided that both parties consent and that no elements of usury (ribā)
or uncertainty (gharar) are present (Ibn ʿAbidin, 1412 AH, Vol. 5, p. 352).
3-4- Conditions for the Validity of Sulh in Qisas
Hanafi jurists have outlined several conditions for the validity of Sulh in Qisas, the most
important of which are as follows:
Full consent of both the heir of the victim (walī al-dam) and the offender: no form of
coercion or compulsion should be involved (al-Sarakhsi, 1421 AH, Vol. 10, p. 168).
Legal capacity of the parties: both the heir of the victim and the offender must be of
sound mind and of legal age. In the case of a minor heir, pardon is not valid unless granted by
the legal guardian in accordance with the best interests of the child (al-Kasani, 1406 AH, Vol. 7,
p. 270).
Clarity of the subject matter of settlement: in compensated Sulh, the amount and type of
consideration must be specified in order to prevent the invalidity of the transaction (Ibn ʿAbidin,
1412 AH).
4-4- Jurisprudential Effects of Sulh in Qisas
In Hanafi jurisprudence, Sulh results in the extinction of the right of Qisas, and
depending on the type of settlement, a financial right such as diyyah becomes established. A
compensated Sulh (ṣulḥ muʿāwaḍah) is regarded as a binding contract (ʿaqd lāzim), and the
parties may not revoke it thereafter (al-Sarakhsi, 1421 AH). Moreover, Sulh does not extinguish
the ḥudūd (fixed punishments prescribed by Allah), except in cases where the right is private in
nature and the heirs of the victim waive it. Hanafi jurists emphasize that Sulh must serve the
purpose of removing hostility and preserving social order.
5- The Difference Between the Hanafi Perspective and Other Schools Regarding
Sulh in Qisas
Islamic jurists unanimously agree on the legitimacy of Sulh in Qisas. However,
differences exist among the schools of jurisprudence concerning the detailed rules and the scope
of permissibility. Compared to other Sunni schools and the Ja‘fari (Imamiyyah) school, Hanafi
jurisprudence adopts a more moderate and expediency-oriented (maṣlaḥah-based) approach.
Some of these differences are as follows:
1-5- Sulh for More or Less than the Prescribed Diyyah
Hanafi jurists hold that the wali al-dam may conclude Sulh for more or less than the
prescribed diyyah, as the right of Qisas belongs exclusively to him, and he has discretion to settle
it in any manner, provided there is mutual consent and no element of deception or gharar is
involved (Ibn ʿĀbidīn, 1412 AH, vol. 5, p. 351). In contrast, the Shafiʿi and Jaʿfari schools
invalidate such a settlement, holding that Sulh is valid only for the full diyyah or less than it,
while Sulh for more than the diyyah is regarded as a void transaction (al-Najafi, 1981, vol. 43, p.
78; al-Nawawi, 1405 AH, vol. 26, p. 180).
669
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
2-5- Binding Nature of Sulh
According to the Hanafis, a Sulh in which the wali al-dam renounces Qisas in return for
property or diyyah is binding and irrevocable, and one cannot revert to Qisas thereafter (al-
Kasani, 1406 AH, vol. 7, p. 270). In contrast, certain schools such as the Maliki school permit
revocation of Sulh in specific cases, particularly if it is established that the wali al-dam was
deceived or subjected to significant unfairness (ghubn fāḥish) (Ibn Rushd, 1995, vol. 2, p. 455).
3-5- The Role of the Judge in Approving Sulh
In Hanafi jurisprudence, judicial intervention is not a requirement for Sulh; reconciliation
between the wali al-dam and the offender is valid upon mutual consent, unless a dispute arises
regarding its validity (al-Sarakhsi, 1421 AH, vol. 10, p. 170). By contrast, some Hanbali jurists
stipulate that Sulh must be concluded with the knowledge and supervision of the judge in order
to prevent corruption or coercion (Ibn Qudāmah, 1405 AH, vol. 9, p. 371).
4-5- Sulh Involving a Minor Heir
Hanafi jurists maintain that the guardian of a minor heir has no right to settle for money
or diyyah unless it is clearly in the best interest of the minor and with judicial approval (Ibn
ʿĀbidīn, 1412 AH). Similarly, this rule applies in Jaʿfari jurisprudence. However, the Maliki
school in certain cases allows the pardon granted by a minor’s guardian even without
compensation (Ibn Rushd, 1995).
5-5- Overall Comparison
In general, Hanafi jurisprudence adopts a more flexible approach towards Sulh in Qisas
and recognizes broader discretion for the wali al-dam. Other schools, however, impose
restrictions in order to prevent potential abuse, corruption, or infringement upon the rights of the
offender or the heirs.
6- Sulh in Qisas in Contemporary Law
Over time, and with the transformation of legal systems in Islamic countries, many
criminal codes—particularly in matters of Qisas—have been shaped under the influence of
Islamic jurisprudence, especially the Hanafi school. Sulh in Qisas is not only recognized within
Islamic jurisprudence but has also acquired a special status in contemporary law as a restorative
and humanitarian mechanism.
1-6- Sulh in Qisas under Afghan Law
The Afghan legal system, considering the Hanafi school as the formal source of
legislation (Article 130 of the Constitution), has formally recognized the institution of Sulh in
Qisas. According to Article 576 of the Afghan Penal Code (2017), the wali al-dam may renounce
his right to Qisas and reconcile with the offender. This reconciliation may be either gratuitous
(ʿafw) or in exchange for compensation (payment of diyyah or another form of property).
Furthermore, Article 60 of the same Code stipulates that in case of reconciliation or
pardon, criminal prosecution of the offender concerning Qisas shall be terminated. However, if
the public aspect of the crime (ḥaqq al-ʿāmmah / public order) remains, the prosecutor may
continue prosecution under the framework of taʿzīr. This approach reflects that Afghan law seeks
to strike a balance between private rights and public interests (Ministry of Justice of Afghanistan,
2017).
2-6- Sulh in Other Islamic Legal Systems
In many Islamic countries—including Pakistan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and Iran—the
institution of Sulh in crimes subject to Qisas is recognized. For example, in the Iranian Islamic
Penal Code (2013), Article 429 explicitly provides that the wali al-dam may reconcile with the
670
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
offender and forgo Qisas, whether by accepting full diyyah, or more, or less than it (Iranian
Islamic Penal Code, 2013).
This development demonstrates either the adoption of, or influence from, Hanafi
jurisprudence in various countries, since many of these laws grant the wali al-dam broad
discretion in determining the type and amount of compensation, consistent with the Hanafi
position (al-Kasani, 1406 AH).
3-6- Sulh as a Mechanism of Restorative Justice
In contemporary legal discourse, particularly within the framework of Restorative Justice,
emphasis is placed upon reconciliation, pardon, and the restoration of relationships between the
victim and the offender. Many scholars of criminal law argue that Sulh in Qisas provides a
foundation for the realization of humane justice and the reduction of penal violence (Yazdani,
2019). Accordingly, social welfare, rehabilitation of the offender, and the satisfaction of the heirs
of the victim are considered as fundamental bases for Sulh in modern legal systems.
4-6- Challenges and Solutions
Contemporary law also faces challenges such as coercion in reconciliation, imposition of
compensation beyond the offender’s capacity, or misuse of the right to compromise. Hanafi
jurisprudence addresses these concerns by requiring genuine consent, prohibiting coercion, and
mandating fairness in reconciliation (al-Sarakhsi, 1421 AH).
Conclusion
The institution of Qisas in Islamic jurisprudence has been established with the primary
objective of ensuring criminal justice and promoting social deterrence. Nevertheless, Islamic
law, through the recognition of Sulh (reconciliation) and pardon as complementary mechanisms
to Qisas, underscores the humanitarian and reformative dimensions of penal sanctions. The
legitimacy of Sulh is expressly affirmed in Qur’an 2:178 and corroborated by various Prophetic
traditions, thereby reflecting the dual emphasis on justice and mercy within Islamic criminal law.
Within this framework, the Hanafi school adopts a pragmatic and interest-oriented
approach, considering Sulh not only lawful but, in certain circumstances, recommended
(mustahabb). This school validates both gratuitous reconciliation and reconciliation with
compensation, permitting the wali al-dam to relinquish the right of Qisas in exchange for more
or less than the prescribed diyyah, provided mutual consent is achieved. Such flexibility
distinguishes Hanafi jurisprudence from the Shafi‘i and Imami schools, which impose stricter
limitations on compensation. Consequently, the Hanafi position significantly expands the
discretionary authority of the victim’s heirs while promoting reconciliation as a means of social
harmony.
In contemporary legal systems, particularly those influenced by Hanafi jurisprudence
such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, the institution of Sulh has been formally incorporated into
codified criminal law. It serves as a restorative and humanitarian alternative to Qisas, reducing
the likelihood of retaliatory violence and fostering reconciliation. Moreover, this framework
aligns closely with modern theories of Restorative Justice, which prioritize offender
rehabilitation, victim satisfaction, and the restoration of social cohesion.
In conclusion, the operationalization of Sulh in Qisas not only safeguards the rights of the
victim’s heirs but also reinforces social stability and prevents discord in accordance with the
wisdom of Islamic law. Nevertheless, effective implementation requires clear legal standards,
judicial supervision, and safeguards against coercion or exploitation to ensure that Sulh fulfills
its intended role as an instrument of justice, mercy, and social order.
671
ResearchBib IF - 11.01, ISSN: 3030-3753, Volume 2 Issue 11
References
1.
Qur’an
2.
Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma‘il. (1400 AH). Al-Jami‘ al-Sahih. Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.
3.
Al-Hindi, Nizam al-Din. (1991). Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah (al-‘Alamgiriyyah). Beirut: Dar
al-Fikr.
4.
Ali, Muhammad Mustafa. (n.d.). Nizam al-Qada’ fi al-Shari‘ah al-Islamiyyah. Riyadh:
Maktabat al-Ma‘arif.
5.
Al-Kasani, Ala al-Din Abu Bakr. (1406 AH). Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘ fi Tartib al-Shara’i‘, Vol.
7. Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
6.
Al-Kasani, Ala al-Din. (1986). Bada’i‘ al-Sana’i‘ fi Tartib al-Shara’i‘. Beirut: Dar al-
Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
7.
Al-Nawawi, Yahya ibn Sharaf. (1405 AH). Al-Majmu‘ Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, Vol. 26.
Beirut: Dar al-Fikr.
8.
Al-Sarakhsi, Muhammad ibn Ahmad. (1421 AH). Al-Mabsut, Vol. 10. Beirut: Dar al-
Ma‘rifah.
9.
Al-Sarakhsi, Shams al-Din. (1406 AH). Al-Mabsut. Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifah.
10.
Al-Zuhaili, Wahbah. (1997). Al-Fiqh al-Islami wa Adillatuh. Damascus: Dar al-Fikr.
11.
Fakhr al-Razi, Muhammad ibn ‘Umar. (1420 AH). Al-Tafsir al-Kabir. Beirut: Dar Ihya’
al-Turath al-‘Arabi.
12.
Ibn ‘Abidin, Muhammad Amin. (2000). Radd al-Muhtar ‘ala al-Durr al-Mukhtar. Beirut:
Dar al-Fikr.
13.
Ibn Humam, Kamal al-Din. (1317 AH). Fath al-Qadir. Cairo: Dar al-Kutub.
14.
Ibn Manzur, Muhammad ibn Mukarram. (1414 AH). Lisan al-‘Arab. Beirut: Dar Sadir.
15.
Jafari Langarudi, Muhammad Jafar. (2005). Terminology of Law. Tehran: Ganj Danesh.
16.
Javadi Amoli, Abdullah. (2016). Islamic Jurisprudence and Criminal Law. Tehran: Isra
Publications.
17.
Najafi, Muhammad Hasan. (1981). Jawahir al-Kalam fi Sharh Shara’i‘ al-Islam, Vol. 43.
Beirut: Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi.
18.
Tabataba’I, Sayyid Muhammad Husayn. (1417 AH). Al-Mizan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an. Qom:
Islamic Publication Institute.
19.
Yazdani, Muhammad. (2019). “Restorative Justice and Its Place in the Islamic Criminal
System.” Islamic Criminal Law Journal, 12(1), 85–102.
Laws
20.
Afghanistan Penal Code, enacted 2017.
21.
Islamic Penal Code of Iran, enacted 2013.
