Stopping False Accusations Commentary

Opinion, July 2003, www.aljazeerah.info

Sayyid Qutb

Arab News

In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Beneficent

As for those who accuse chaste women (of adultery), and cannot produce four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes; and do not accept their testimony ever after; for they are indeed transgressors. Excepted are those who afterwards repent and make amends; for God is much-forgiving, merciful.

And as for those who accuse their own wives (of adultery), but have no witnesses except themselves, let each of them call God four times to witness that he is indeed telling the truth; and the fifth time, that God’s curse be upon him if he is telling a lie. However, punishment is averted from her if she calls God four times to witness that he is indeed telling a lie; and the fifth time, that God’s curse be upon her if he is telling the truth.

Were it not for God’s favor upon you and His grace, and that God is the One who accepts repentance, the wise...! (Light, Al-Noor: 24: 4-10)

We spoke last week about the punishment of those who accuse chaste women of adultery, without providing four witnesses. Such an accusation is considered false unless the accuser can prove it by producing four witnesses, all testifying to having seen the adultery being committed. Such a false accusation incurs a very severe punishment, which is 80 lashes, making it close to the punishment of adultery. Furthermore, the accuser is considered a wicked person whose testimony is not acceptable in any case.

The point at issue here is that the Muslim community does not lose much by suppressing an accusation that cannot be proved. It certainly loses much more by condoning accusations that are bound to spread easily, without any possibility of being proved. Indeed when such accusations become subject of casual conversation, they serve to encourage people to do the same, while stopping any discussion of such matters, unless clearly proved, gives a clear message that adultery, which is an abominable offence, is rare or even nonexistent in society. Moreover, false accusation of chaste women causes the latter much pain and mental suffering, in addition to its being a means of destroying families and ruining relations.

The punishment meted out to the false accuser continues to hang over his head, even after its administration, unless he genuinely repents: “Excepted are those who afterward repent and make amends; for God is much-forgiving, merciful.”

Scholars differ in their understanding of this exception: does it apply only to the last punishment, which means that the accuser is no longer considered a transgressor, but continues nevertheless to be unacceptable as a witness in any situation? Or would he be acceptable as a witness once he has declared his repentance? Malik, Ahmad and Al-Shafie are of the view that once he has repented, he is no longer a transgressor. He is again acceptable as a witness. On the other hand, Abu Haneefah maintains that repentance only stops him being considered a transgressor, but he remains unacceptable as a witness. Al-Shaabi and Al-Dhahhak, renowned scholars of the early Islamic period, say that despite his repentance, he is unacceptable as a witness unless he admits that his original accusation was false.

I personally prefer this last view, because it adds to the accuser’s repentance a clear declaration by him that the accused is innocent. In this way, all effects of the accusation are removed. No one can then say that the punishment was inflicted on the accuser because of lack of sufficient supporting evidence. No one who has heard the accusation would continue to entertain any thought that its substance was correct, and that it could have been proved if more witnesses were ready to come forward. Thus, the innocent would have their innocence confirmed both socially and legally. This leaves no reason to continue to punish the accuser by refusing his testimony, after he had repented his original action and declared that the accusation he made was false.

All the foregoing applies to accusing women of adultery. An exception is made, however, in the case of a husband accusing his wife. To require him to produce four witnesses is unreasonable. In normal situations, a man does not accuse his wife falsely, because the very accusation carries a negative reflection against his own honor and against his own children. Hence, this type of accusation has a totally different ruling: “And as for those who accuse their own wives (of adultery), but have no witnesses except themselves, let each of them call God four times to witness that he is indeed telling the truth; and the fifth time, that God’s curse be upon him if he is telling a lie. However, punishment is averted from her if she calls God four times to witness that he is indeed telling a lie; and the fifth time, that God’s curse be upon her if he is telling the truth. Were it not for God’s favor upon you and His grace, and that God is the One who accepts repentance, the wise...!”

This ruling lightens the burden for married people in a way that takes their special circumstances into consideration. A man may find his wife in a compromising position but may have no one else witnessing the deed. In this case, he swears by God four times that he is telling the truth, and adds a fifth incurring God’s curse on himself if he is telling a lie. These oaths are called testimonies, because he is the only witness. When he has done so, he pays her any portion of her dowry that may be outstanding, and she is finally divorced. She is also liable to the punishment of adultery. However, she can avert this punishment by swearing by God four times that her husband is telling lies against her, and adds a fifth incurring God’s curse on herself if he is telling the truth. If she does, then no punishment is administered in this case, but the marriage is irrevocably terminated. If she is pregnant, the child is called after her, not after her husband. No one may attach any blame to the child. If anyone makes any accusation against the child, that person is liable to punishment.

The Surah comments on this ruling that allows for the delicacy of the circumstances in such situations by saying: “Were it not for God’s favor upon you and His grace, and that God is the One who accepts repentance, the wise...!” It does not tell us what would have happened, had God not bestowed His favors and grace on us in this way, and His grace manifested in accepting our repentance. The statement leaves us with an impression that it is something very serious, and that people are much better off, avoiding it through God’s grace.

Earth, a planet hungry for peace

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).

The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03).