At the outset, let it be understood that the concepts invoked in this discourse are universal without any characterization. The sanctity of life is inspired in every soul and ingrained in every rational mind, irrespective of faith denomination, or other affiliations. Capital punishment for homicide has generally been the norm in all criminal justice systems since ancient times. Many nations still practice the death penalty even for ordinary crimes. In the latter part of the 18th century, however, there began a movement to limit the scope of capital punishment. With the emergence of western democracies, the political calculus for votes and power also changed, giving further traction to this movement. The pendulum began to swing from one extreme to the other – from killing for trivial offenses to harboring even the killers. Since 1976, 75 countries have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, while others have eliminated it for ordinary crimes only. Most notable among 55 nations that still retain the death penalty include China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Taiwan, and the United States.
Islam’s commitment to reform society and its injunctions to protect it against capital crimes remain firm and uncompromised. The sacredness of life is clearly and vehemently asserted in the Islamic doctrines. Taking a human life is prohibited and declared ‘haram’ – a gruesome physical act that is also morally erosive and detrimental to public safety. This prohibition applies generically to life as such, whether human life or non-human, such as animals. Considering a necessity for survival, slaughtering certain animals for food in a limited sense is an exception, but not for sports or commercial activities. The underlying notion is that the act of taking someone’s life is an infringement upon Allah’s Sovereignty. He is the One who has created life and He alone reserves the right to terminate it as and when He wills.
The Qur’an repeatedly stresses that killing a soul is a heinous crime. For instance, “Do not kill any soul whose killing has been prohibited by Allah…” [Qur’an, 17: 33]; and “It does not befit a Believer to slay another Believer except by error…..” [Qur’an, 4: 92] Revering life, the Prophet Muhammad SAW says: Life is holier than the Ka’bah, the first structure founded on earth for the worship of One Allah. Despite its significance, a demolished Ka’bah can be restored, as in the past; but a lost life cannot be retrieved once the soul leaves the body. The soul is a command of Allah SWT (amr-e-Rabbi). A person who kills someone intentionally commits a transgression against Allah’s Sovereignty and is condemned to Hell eternally. This indicates the severity of the crime that must not be allowed to happen in a civil society.
Islam is against violence in all its forms and at whatever level it is committed. Its priority is to restore human dignity. A society that fails to respect life or tolerates violence against it does not deserve to be called a just and civilized society nor can it enjoy the benefits of peace and security. Islam’s overarching view is that disrespecting one life is to disrespect the entire humanity and killing one life is like killing the entire humanity: “He who slays a soul, unless it be (in punishment) for murder or for spreading mischief on earth shall be as if he had slain all mankind…” [Qur’an, 5: 32] Thus, it is the mindset or the madness that instigates an unhinged person to vilify life which is so disturbing. The result is the loss of life, regardless of the number lost. A person who has no respect for life, the number of lives to him has no meaning at all.
Conversely, a person who respects life, in fact, respects humanity. Saving one life to him means saving society. Again, it is the mental conditioning that controls one’s conduct fortifying the nobility of life: “… he who saved a life shall be as if he had given life to all mankind…” [Qur’an, 5: 32] Such a person is indeed altruistic who lives a life beyond himself.
The undeniable truth is that the survival of human life depends on everyone respecting and protecting other human beings. Whoever kills deliberately is thus not merely guilty of committing a sinful act to one single person, but also demonstrates by his action that his heart is devoid of respect for human life and of sympathy for the human species as such. Such a person, therefore, is an enemy of all mankind. This is so because he possesses a quality which, if ever to become common to all men, would lead to the destruction of the entire human race. The person who helps preserve even one life, on the other hand, is the protector of the whole humanity, for he possesses a quality that is indispensable to the survival of mankind.
Accordingly, in a just and civilized society, a murderer by his own act and choice loses his right to live and his life must be ended if convicted after due process. The death penalty is to protect society and is a moral imperative to render justice to the victim’s family. Opposition to it is a gambit and political posturing. It tends to blindly harbor the criminals, abandon the victims, and needlessly endanger society. State-sanctioned death penalty for killing boosts the safety factor and is reassuring to the community. Societies that practice capital punishment feel relatively more secure than those who oppose it as inhumane, further denigrating the victims of a horrible crime.
A cursory review of the statistical data on countries that practice the death penalty and those who have abolished it does not reveal any definitive trend differentiating them in terms of their policy effectiveness. What seems clear, however, is the impact of culture on the number of violent crimes. A culture of non-violence, such as gun control and strict law enforcement, has a dominating impact on reducing violent crimes. Such a culture combined with the death penalty seems to be the most effective strategy to control capital crimes and save lives. Examples of countries in this category with a homicide rate per 100,000 are Japan (0.2), Singapore (0.2), China (0.6), and Saudi Arabia (1.3). Countries that have abolished the death penalty but still have strict measures against violence are not far off. Such countries include Germany (1.0), UK (1.2), France (1.3), and Canada (1.8). It gets scary for countries suffering from compromised rule of law with or without the death penalty. Some of them experience a staggering rate as high as 61.80.
The U.S. is a conglomerate of 50 States and is a mixed bag. Of the total, 27 States have abolished capital punishment and each has its own gun control laws and an army of lobbyists fighting against any controls. The overall statistical picture, however, is not much different from the pattern observed globally. The homicide rate in 2020, for example, ranged from 0.9 in New Hampshire to 28.2 in the District of Columbia, with an overall average of 6.6 for the country. Despite being high relative to the other western countries, there is no reason to take comfort in the fact that Russia is even worse with a shocking rate of 9.2.
Sometimes painful decisions have to be made in the interest of the larger good. The stability and wellbeing of the society is Islam’s priority and it makes its case: “O’ Men of understanding, there is life for you in retribution…” [Qur’an, 2: 179] In cases of homicides, retribution is emphasized as a rule, particularly for the people of wisdom who care for the safety of the society. This refutes the notion ingrained in the minds of many against bringing a culprit to justice. On one hand, there are those who tend to exceed moderation in revenging and, on the other, are those opposed to the death penalty even for manslaughter. Unfortunately, they misconstrue the notion of leniency. Compassion is commendable when reform is expected. It should not be a reward for bad behavior, however.
The Qur’an turns to intelligent people cautioning them against such ill-conceived leniency. The sanity of human society rests on the application of penalties proportionate to crimes. Holding sacred the lives of those who decimate others’ lives is in principle condoning and fueling violence against the society only to escalate it further. To save the life of one murderer is to unjustly risk the lives of many others. It is a debasement of the criminal justice system and makes absolutely no sense to the reformatory efforts of a society to root this barbaric crime out.
It is paradoxical that society sometimes makes short-sighted political choices that defeat its own ideals. The peace and safety of people depend on the rule of law. The effectiveness of a law is a function of a coherent penal code that preemptively prevents crimes in conjunction with a proactive enforcement apparatus that swiftly deals with them when they do occur. Any laxity along this chain is self-defeating. Anarchy and chaos seep in when the law and order break down and people lose confidence in their government. If a crime-free society is desired, the society must first create an environment of civic discipline through education and legislation. For eliminating the death penalty, similarly, it must first create a culture of non-violence and reduce the murder rate to ideally zero by using all correctives measures and disciplinary tools available. Short of that, being humane to a killer amounts to being inhumane to the victim.
The irony still; the actions confirm the inner-held convictions. On the other hand, contradictions make hypocrisy transparent. Some progressive nations, that consider capital punishment inhuman even when inhuman crimes are committed, do not hesitate to kill innocents mercilessly when it comes to advancing their economic and geopolitical ambitions abroad. The only compelling conclusion that can be drawn is what matters is not the life as such, rather whose life!
This is in sharp contrast with Islam’s global view that life under every skin matters. Pursuant to this, its approach is just the opposite to prevent crimes and secure public serenity. First, it reinforces the inviolability of life through moral teachings and disciplinary measures so that it is not ignorantly denigrated and trampled. If someone still disregards a person’s life and takes it away, he is treated as a danger to society and loses his right to live. The good of the society overrides individuals’ freedom poised to promote lawlessness. While killing is prohibited, sparing the life of a killer legislatively is chaotic in character. The Qur’an captures the logic: “… (though killing is haram) fitna (persecution) is even worse than killing…” [Qur’an, 2: 191]
Islam does consider taking life as permissible when doing so is right: “Do not kill any soul whose killing has been prohibited by Allah except with right…” [Qur’an, 17: 33] Accordingly, the Islamic law declares killing as legitimate in only five specific cases: retribution against one guilty of murder; when the fighting becomes a moral necessity in defense of the oppressed or against aggression; capital punishment for those engaged in an uprising against a legitimate government; capital punishment for committing adultery; and capital punishment for committing apostasy. It is only in these five cases that human life forfeits its sanctity after due process under the law.
Compassion is a virtue and is greatly valued universally, especially when it serves a noble purpose.
Accidents do happen and mistakes are made. Islamic law does provide provisions for such incidents. As a matter of law, to be clear, the retribution is in order: “…Retribution is prescribed…in cases of killing…” [Qur’an, 2: 178] It implies that the heirs of the victim are entitled to claim retribution. However, a provision of leniency has also been provided: “… But if something of a murderer’s guilt is remitted by his brother this should be adhered to in fairness and payment be made in a goodly manner …” [Qur’an, 2: 178] In light of this, the heirs have the right either to full retribution or kindly forgive the culprit or to altogether forego the right of retribution in lieu of monetary compensation.
Contrary to the misconception, Islam encourages settlement in favor of sparing life: “… We have granted the heir of him who has been wrongfully killed the authority to (claim retribution); so let him not exceed in the slaying.” [Qur’an, 17: 33] In the interest of saving a life, the Islamic penal code allows parties to settle a homicide case through mutual consent in fairness. In general, whenever forgiveness is expected to manifest a constructive outcome broadly benefitting the society and specifically the parties in conflict, Islam appreciates it as a grandiose gesture worthy of a majestic reward: “The return of evil is a like evil; then whoever pardons and seeks reconcilement, his reward is with Allah…” [Qur’an, 42: 40]
Islamic Point of View 