Four Male Witnesses Again

By Syed Akbar Ali

I had a disappointing morning today, along with about 200 other people. We were waiting for a talk on the 'Future of Islamic Civilisation' by an eminent speaker from overseas, an Arab sheikh. He was due to start the talk at 9:45 am. Until 12.00 PM there was no sign of him. Does not bode well for the future.

.

To keep the guests occupied, someone played a You Tube video of the sheikh on the screen. The You Tube video was in Arabic, which many people did not understand. Ironically also the You Tube video was titled 'Etiquette in Attaining Knowledge'.

.

Anyway, here is a recent news report from the NST

.

KUALA LUMPUR: The Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department (Jawi) has launched its own investigations into the sex video clip . . following the police report lodged by Angkatan Muda Keadilan (AMK) . . . under Section 41 of the Syariah Criminal Offences Act for Qazaf . . . . anyone who accuses another person of committing adultery must have four witnesses, a confession from the accused and strong evidence. . . (JAWI) is now looking for witnesses to facilitate their investigations.

.

Read more: Religious dept begins probe into sex video cliphttp://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/6fian/Article/#ixzz1JeiYXmMj

.

How interesting. Do you think they will ever succeed in their investigations? In the Quran, Allah says that He is just. And the Quran also tells us to stand up for justice (qaa iman bil qist).

.

Just for your information : "Pertuduhan qazaf ialah membuat tuduhan terhadap seseorang yang melakukan zina tanpa membawa empat saksi lelaki, dan jika sabit kesalahan boleh dihukum maksimum penjara tiga tahun atau denda RM5,000 atau kedua-duanya sekali"

.

The requirement for 'four witnesses' by the religious authorities is not so straightforward as reported by the NST. It has to be four MALE witnesses. Then they must also be of GOOD CHARACTER.

.

GOOD CHARACTER is also determined by whether the FOUR MALES had attended the Friday prayers without any break for three consecutive weeks. There may be other views on this, because this is also extra-Quranic, not from the Quran (We also have to ask the scholars the relevant time period, ie three consecutive Fridays before they witnessed the adultery, during the trial or when?)

.

I must remind you that these prescriptions are EXTRA QURANIC. Meaning they are not found in the Quran. This is a point of accuracy only.

.

One commentor keeps repeating that I am not showing the Quranic verse that requires four witnesses for ZINA. To be precise, my quick answer is, there are no verses which mention ZINA explicitly and then state that ZINA requires four witnesses. I cannot show you a verse that does not exist. If anyone knows of any such explicit verses in the Quran which require four witnesses for ZINA, please show us these verses. Thanking you in advance.

.

Back to the topic, so even if there were say 10 witnesses of the ZINA but they were all women, then their evidence is of no use, it is not admissible. For ZINA only four male witnesses are accepted. As I said this is not found in the Quran. It is extra Quranic.

.

The Police have already interviewed the Chinese girl in the video. We can safely assume that she is not a Muslim. For the purposes of the Qazaf investigation reported by the NST above, being a non Muslim Chinese female and a person who does not attend the Friday prayers, can she be of any use at all as a witness? I dont think so. So what remains is the real culprit – the second person involved in the zina. Can we expect him to confess to the zina? I dont think he is that crazy.

.

Then there is one of the three Dato T, who was in the video. But he did not witness the actual 'batang celak masuk ke dalam botol celak' - which is a requirement of the religious people.

.

Their law requires that the FOUR MALE witnesses of good character must actually stand around and keep their eyes intensely focussed on the actual act of penetration. Thats where the 'batang celak masuk ke dalam botol celak' comes from. (And you thought I made it up !!) Nope, its their legal terminology. So in this case, even the Dato T's witness goes out the window because he did not witness the 'batang celak'.

.

Hence for the Qazaf investigation, the entire “case” will be thrown out the window. No four male witnesses, no zina. Culprit walks scot free. Instead the three persons who made the accusation (the Dato T trio) can be found guilty of Qazaf. Now isn't that neat?

.

Now do you see why some clever people insist they want to solve some of their ‘hanky panky’ problems in the religious court ?

.

So folks, what do you think? Is this justice? You are entitled to your answer. I dont know what your answer will be but it will depend a lot on whether your head is screwed correctly onto your shoulders or not. Here is a clue : please be honest.

.

Now here is another news report from The Star:

.

"Boyfriend and five others strip and abuse 14-year-old in abandoned house

DUNGUN: ".. a horrifying outing for a 14-year-old girl who ended up being gang-raped . . Instead of sending her to her house in Jalan Bunga Raya, the friend took her to an abandoned house in Batu Tujuh, where six men .. were waiting at about 1am. . They then took turns to rape her for several hours . ."

.
Again if we apply the FOUR MALE WITNESSES requirement, where is this 14 year old girl going to find four male witnesses of good character to testify that she was gang raped? All the males who witnessed her rape were the rapists. Certainly not of good character at all.

In Pakistan, women who were raped and became pregnant as a result of the rape, ended up being jailed for adultery instead. Here is a picture of some of these women in jail in Pakistan. This picture is from the time of President Musharraf.

.

Some or most of these women in the picture were imprisoned for 'zina' because they could not bring four male witnesses to testify that they had been raped (and they had become pregnant - you can see them holding babies in the picture). So without four male witnesses they were instead jailed for committing adultery. If any of them were brave enough to ACCUSE (Qazaf) any man of raping them, then they could also be charged in the Pakistani (kangaroo) courts for Qazaf too.Double jeopardy. So where is the justice?

Eventually President Pervez Musharraf signed a Law to help such women get out of jail. However Musharraf was thrown out of office and now even the rapists are wondering what happened to the Law that he signed.

So in theory at least, it is possible for the seven guys in Dungun who were arrested for gang rape to go to the religious authorities and file a complaint of Qazaf against the 14 year old girl. And cant they also file a complaint against the Police who arrested them for gang rape? I am just wondering lah.

.

I am simply using the same logic lah. If the seven guys in Dungun file a complaint of Qazaf with the religious authorities, then the 14 year old girl can also be held liable. Since the Police arrested them, the Police can also be liable for Qazaf.

.

Then both the 14 year old girl and the Police must bring four male witnesses of good character, to testify in the religious court that they witnessed the girl being gang raped. If they cannot bring four male witnesses, then both the 14 year old girl and the Police can be or must be held liable for Qazaf. What do you think? I am just following through with the logic.

.

If you dont agree with me, think of it this way. Say there was no Police Station, set up according to the secular, British based legal system we have in Malaysia. Then the girl would have been taken straight to the local religious authorities - like what happened to the Pakistani women in the picture above. Then they would have asked the girl to produce four male witnesses. This is what happened in Pakistan. Of course she cannot produce four male witnesses. So instead she can be held for Qazaf - accusing the seven males of gang raping her without bringing four witnesses.

A commentor did ask me about two verses in the Quran which he felt were proof that the Quran requires four witnesses for ZINA (in capital letters for my emphasis)

24:13 Mengapa mereka tidak membawa empat orang saksi membuktikan tuduhan itu. oleh kerana mereka tidak mendatangkan empat orang saksi, maka mereka itu pada sisi allah, adalah orang yang dusta;

24:4 Orang yang melemparkan tuduhan kepada perempuan yang terpelihara kehormatannya, kemudian mereka tidak membawakan empat orang saksi, maka sebatlah mereka lapan puluh kali sebatan dan janganlah kamu menerima penyaksian mereka itu selama-lamanya; kerana mereka adalah orang yang fasiq.

.

I have replied in some detail. The quick and the short answer is the Arabic word ZINA is not found in these two verses. You can please check by yourself.

.

However it will be useful to repeat the story of the Prophet Joseph:

.

Surah 12:26 "He said, "She is the one who tried to seduce me." A witness from her familysuggested: "If his garment is torn from the front, then she is telling the truth and he is a liar."

.

The King's wife had accused Joseph of trying to seduce her. Joseph was found innocent of the charge through forensic evidence - a witness from the accuser's own family suggested to look at Joseph's shirt. If it was torn from the front, he was lying. If it was torn from the back, then the woman was lying. The shirt was torn from the back, proving that the King's wife was trying to seduce him.

.

Please also note that 'a witness from her family' is referring to a woman. The arabic is like this : "washahida shahidun min ahliha" (This refers to a female witness). Do check it out for yourself. Bukan saya tulis. Jangan marah saya ok.

.

So in the story of the Prophet Joseph in the Quran, the witness (shahida) of just one woman was accepted which was instrumental to free a Prophet of God from a vicious accusation.

.

You may ask "Why repeat the story of Joseph? Apa kena mengena?" The purpose of the Quran repeating what happened to the Messengers is many fold. Here are two of them :

.

[11:120] We narrate to you enough history of the messengers to strengthen your heart

[40:54] (Their history) is a lesson and a reminder for those who possess intelligence.

.

In the Quran forensic evidence brought forward by a single female witness proved the innocence of the Prophet Joseph. We must strengthen our hearts and take lessons from this history too. However this is only "for those who possess intelligence'.

.

But what if people insist on saying 'tidak boleh menggunakan akal' ? What shall be the future of the civilisation then? .