Shariah Law and Public Whipping: A Criminal Lawyer’s Perspective
Terengganu Shariah Court’s Order Defended
A criminal lawyer, Shamsher Singh Thind, has come to the defense of the Terengganu shariah court’s order for the public whipping of a man convicted of close proximity, saying that the state’s shariah enactment does not specify where it could be carried out.
Section 230(2) of the Syariah Criminal Procedure (Terengganu) Enactment 2001
Shamsher, who holds a diploma in shariah legal practice, pointed out that Section 230(2) of the Syariah Criminal Procedure (Terengganu) Enactment 2001 stipulates that in the event where any matter is not expressly provided by this enactment, the court shall apply Islamic law. In this case, Islamic law allows for the whipping to be carried out publicly, "which is why I believe that the judge did not violate any laws (in ordering for the public whipping)", he said in a Facebook post.
Public Caning Scheduled to Proceed
Earlier today, the Terengganu government said it was committed to conducting a public caning of a man convicted by the shariah court for khalwat tomorrow, despite widespread criticism. Information, propagation and shariah empowerment committee chairman Khalil Abdul Hadi said it demonstrates the state government’s commitment to strengthening shariah laws in Terengganu.
Affendi Awang’s Conviction
On Dec 11, the Terengganu shariah appeals court unanimously upheld the punishment meted out to Affendi Awang, 42, by the shariah high court. Affendi, a father of five, was sentenced to six strokes of the rotan after pleading guilty to being in close proximity with a woman who was not his wife. He had committed khalwat with a 52-year-old woman at a house in Kemaman on June 16, having been convicted of the same offence on two previous occasions.
Differences between Shariah and Civil Offences
Shamsher defended PAS and the PAS-led Terengganu against accusations that it was oppressing the people. He said the whipping carried out for shariah offences differed from the ones carried out for civil offences, in that it was "softer" and would not injure the offender, while the cane used was thinner compared to the ones used for civil offences. Shamsher reminded detractors that if "you spare the rod, you spoil the child".
Conclusion
The debate surrounding the public whipping of Affendi Awang continues, with some critics arguing that it is a form of corporal punishment that is inhumane and ineffective in deterring crime. However, Shamsher’s defense of the Terengganu shariah court’s order highlights the importance of understanding the nuances of shariah law and its application in different contexts.
FAQs
Q: What is the basis for the public whipping of Affendi Awang?
A: The public whipping is based on Section 230(2) of the Syariah Criminal Procedure (Terengganu) Enactment 2001, which allows for the application of Islamic law in cases where it is not explicitly provided for.
Q: What is the difference between shariah and civil offences?
A: Shariah offences are punished differently from civil offences, with the former involving a "softer" whipping and a thinner cane compared to the latter.
Q: Does the public whipping of Affendi Awang violate human rights?
A: Shamsher argues that the whipping does not violate human rights, as it is a punishment that is allowed under shariah law and is intended to deter crime.