SHARIAsource

This qanun regulates the shari'a courts (Mahkamah Syar'iyah) of Aceh, as well as the personnel and hierarchy therein. It also defines the areas of law over which the courts have jurisdiction, those being al-syakhshiyah (family law), mu'amalah (civil and commercial law), and jinayat (criminal law). The elucidation of the qanun defines jinayat as including offences such as zina (extra-marital sex), accusation of zina, murder, physical abuse, alcohol consumption, gambling, and failure to abide by prayer and fasting requirements.

Brunei lawmakers gazetted the notification of commencement of the Syariah Courts Criminal Procedure Code Order of 2018 in December 2018, announcing that the Code would commence on January 1, 2019. 

The six co-accused were accused of gambling (maisir), contrary to arts 5 and 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003 on Gambling, in conjunction with art 55(1) of the Indonesian Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana). Items used in the prohibited activities, including money, were seized by authorities and entered as evidence. In finding the co-accused guilty of the offence, the court acknowledged that Allah prohibits every Muslim from gambling, as contained in Qur'anic verses 90 and 91 in Surah Almaidah. Despite the absence of two of the six co-accused, the court, pursuant to art 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003, in light of time already served in detention, as prescribed in art 23(2) and (3) of Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, handed down the minimum prescribed punishment of six strokes of the cane.

The accused allegedly facilitated gambling for other persons, contrary to arts 6 and 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003 on Gambling. Items used in the prohibited activities included one mobile phone, two bingo (togel) sheets were written, and IDR 3 million in cash. In finding the accused guilty of the offence, the court acknowledged that Allah prohibits every Muslim from gambling, as contained in Qur'anic verses 90 and 91 in Surah Almaidah. The court, pursuant to art 23(1) of Qanun No. 13 of 2003, initially prescribed seven strokes of the cane but, in light of time already served in detention, as prescribed in art 23(2) and (3) of Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, reduced the punishment to six strokes.

The Siyāsat al-Mulūk is a mirror for princes written by an anonymous author sometime in the mid-fourth-tenth century. The author was likely a late Abbasid official in the financial administration who became a high official during the early Buyid era and wrote this treatise for the new rulers. In a chapter on the shurṭa, the text offers the most detailed administration of Islamic criminal justice in the Abbasid and Buyid periods. The author gives recommendations and instructions for the ṣāḥib al-shurṭa (chief criminal magistrate and police chief) based on how he should manage his various subordinates, inspect prisons, and patrol the city along with procedures not mentioned in other texts, such as the use of informants. Scans of the chapter on the shurṭa in this manuscript from Süleymaniye Library in Istanbul have been made available.

In Ayub Masih v. State (23 Aug 2022), Justice Qazi Faez Isa and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah granted bail on an interim petition, pending trial, to the plaintiff Salamat Mansha Masih, who was arrested for “preaching and making blasphemous remarks” in April 2021. Masih was denied bail by the Sessions Judge and the Judge of the High Court, who relied on the First Information Report (FIR), which alleges that the petitioner was a preacher, and the statements of the four witnesses. Upon review, the Supreme Court declared that an “examination of the charge reveals material deficiencies ... [and] does not contain a number of prescribed requirements with regard to the framing of the charge,” casting doubt on the reliablity of the FIR and testimony from the four witnesses. Namely, the Court pointed to the misidentification of the petitioner as a preacher, and the lack of corroborating evidence for the witness testimony. Remanding the case without deciding on the merits, the Court charged the lower courts with observing the constitutional requirements for fair trials in blasphemy and other criminal law cases. Constitutional requirements of applying shari'a, alongside its fundamental rights and fair trial provisions, include consideration of the Islamic law doubt canon instructing judges to ”avoid criminal punishments in cases of doubt”), and thereby requiring heightened procedures, a beyond a reasonable doubt standard for criminal convictions. For further studies of the doubt canon, together with the heightened procedures, standards of proof, and interpretive norms requiring lenity in Islamic criminal law, see Intisar Rabb, Doubt in Islamic Law (Cambridge University Press 2015).

This replacement law on government regulation regulates gubernatorial, regent, and mayoral elections. These include the registration of candidates, requirements candidates must meet prior to registration, campaigning, voting procedures, and supervision and sanctions applicable to counting and recounting votes. It also regulates the applicable code of ethics, administrative breaches, dispute resolution, criminal conduct, state administrative disputes, and election result disputes.

The prosecution submitted that, on Wednesday 19 August 2015 at around 2.00pm, the accused was found providing gambling facilities to the public from his home. Specifically, the accused had been facilitating bingo-style (toto gelap) bets via a mobile phone, taking up to 20 per cent commission for every number issued. The prosecution submitted that this type of activity was in contravention of arts 5 and 23(1) of Aceh Qanun No. 13 of 2003 on Gambling. The prosecution also stated that the accused, as a Muslim residing in Aceh, knew that gambling was a prohibited activity.

Based on items seized at the time of the arrest of the accused, including IDR 113,000 in cash, as well as corroborating information provided by two police witnesses, the court found the accused guilty of the charges submitted by the prosecution. Citing Surah Al-Maidah verse 90, and, pursuant to art 23(2) of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, taking into account time already served by the accused on remand, the court sentenced the accused to nine strokes of the cane.

The prosecution submitted that, on Friday 28 August 2015 at around 10.00pm, the accused was found providing gambling facilities to the public. Specifically, the accused had, for the past three months, been facilitating bingo-style (toto gelap) bets via a mobile phone for a larger gambling agency in Hong Kong, and taking as much as a 7 per cent commission for every number issued. The prosecution submitted that this type of activity was in contravention of arts 5 and 23(1) of Aceh Qanun No. 13 of 2003 on Gambling.

Based on items seized at the time of the arrest of the accused, which included two mobile phones, as well as corroborating information provided by three police witnesses, the court found the accused guilty of the charges submitted by the prosecution. Citing Surah Al-Maidah verse 90, and, pursuant to art 23(2) of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, taking into account time already served by the accused on remand, the court sentenced the accused to nine strokes of the cane.

The prosecution submitted that, on Saturday 12 December 2015 at around 4.30pm, the accused was found providing gambling facilities to the public from a coffee shop. Specifically, the accused had been facilitating bingo-style (toto gelap) bets via a mobile phone for a larger gambling agency, and taking a commission for every number issued, depending on the quantum of the bet placed. The prosecution submitted that this type of activity was in contravention of the prohibition on gambling contained in art 18 of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 on Criminal Law. Moreover, as a Muslim residing in Aceh, that the accused knew such conduct was haram (forbidden).

Based on items seized at the time of the arrest of the accused, which included IDR 10,000 in cash, as well as corroborating information provided by three police witnesses, the court found the accused guilty of the charges submitted by the prosecution. Citing Surah Al-Maidah verses 90 and 91, and, pursuant to art 23(2) of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, the court, taking into account time already served by the accused on remand, sentenced the accused to seven strokes of the cane. The court also cited art 73(3) of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014, which states that, in the event another qanun prescribes alternative punishments, including imprisonment, a fine, or caning, the appropriate punishment to be handed down is caning.

The scope of this qanun is confined to creed (aqidah), shari'a (syariah), and moral disposition (akhlak). The qanun defines moral disposition (akhlak) as symbolism (syiar) and proselytisation (dakwah), and shari'a as:

1. worship (ibadah);
2. family law (ahwal al-syakhshiyah);
3. civil law (muamalah);
4. criminal law (jinayat);
5. judiciary (qadha');
6. education (tarbiyah); and
7. defence of Islam.

The qanun states that the implementation of the Islamic principles regulated therein is part of a more significant overall objective, that being to implement Islamic principles in their entirety. It places the responsibility to implement Islamic principles on the Acehnese government, as well as the regency/municipal governments within Aceh, mandating the governments to allocate at least five per cent of their respective budgets to facilitate such implementation. The qanun also obligates all Muslims in Aceh to adhere to Islamic principles and customs, and every legal entity domiciled in Aceh to respect the implementation of Islamic principles.

The prosecution submitted that, on 28 April 2010 at around 9.30pm, the male and female co-accused were found in close proximity together out of wedlock (khalwat). Specifically, the female co-accused had allegedly left her home to purchase noodles, unbeknownst to her husband and without his blessing. After leaving her home, the female co-accused had collected the first witness and met the male co-accused, who had been waiting for her at a roadside point. The female co-accused then told the first witness to leave her alone with the male co-accused. Both co-accused were allegedly found in close proximity with one another by the husband of the female co-accused (the second witness). When the second witness found the two co-accused, the male co-accused allegedly left the scene.

The prosecution submitted that the conduct of the co-accused contravened arts 5 and 22(2) of Aceh Qanun No. 14 of 2003. Accordingly, it requested that the court sentence the co-accused to two months' imprisonment, and that it order both co-accused to pay a fine of IDR 5 million each.

The court dismissed the application of the prosecution on the grounds that, on the evidence before it, the co-accused had not committed khalwat, as defined in art 2 of Aceh Qanun No. 14 of 2003. Specifically, the definition of khalwat specifies that the conduct of both parties must be heading towards adultery (zina). Based on the submissions made by all the relevant parties, the court concluded that the conduct of the co-accused resembled an ordinary conversation. Therefore, citing art 191(1) of Law No. 8 of 1981 on Criminal Procedure, the court released the co-accused on the grounds that the prosecution had failed to establish any misconduct on their part.

The prosecution submitted that the accused had raped the 13-year old victim, his own biological daughter, contrary to arts 49, and 1(30) and (25) of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 on Criminal Law, on a day in October 2015 at around 4.00pm, and then again on 5 November 2015 at around 4.30pm. The prosecution submitted that upon learning that his daughter had been physically intimate with her own step-father, the accused visited her at his sibling's home, where she was living, and raped her on at least two occasions. On the first occasion, the accused allegedly told the victim that he was raping her because she was no longer virginal ('udah hancur'), that she therefore had ruined her future, and that he would take her to Medan where she could become a prostitute ('lonte'). On the second occasion, on 5 November 2015, the accused again allegedly raped the victim while threatening her that he would either kill her or send her to Medan to become a prostitute.

A medical report submited by the prosecution revealed that the victim had been raped on several occasions. The prosecution submitted that, pursuant to arts 49, and 1(30) and (25) of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 on Criminal Law, the prescribed punishment for incestuous rape is either between 150 and 200 strokes of the cane, a fine of between 1500 and 2000 grams of pure gold, or a prison sentence of between 150 and 200 months. The prosecution requested, therefore, that the accused be imprisoned for 16 years.

The court acknolwedged that the charge was one of rape, rather than zina (sexual relations out of wedlock), meaning that the evidentiary burden contained in Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure applied, rather than that of four witnesses, as in cases of zina. Moreover, as Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 prescribed a ta'zir punishment for rape, the court was of the opinion that a prison sentence would reduce the chances of the accused reoffending. In sentencing the accused to 15 years' jail, less time already served on remand, the court also acknowledged the seriousness of the offence and the need to protect children from such abuse, citing Law No. 35 of 2014 on Amendments to Law No. 23 of 2002 on Child Protection.

The prosecution submitted that, on 14 December 2015 at around 10.00pm, the five co-accused were found playing joker card games with each other for money. This, the prosecution maintained, contravened art 18 Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 on Criminal Law.

The court referred to the definition of 'gambling' (maisir), as contained in art 1(22) of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014, which defines gambling as conduct containing the placing of bets and/or taking a chance between two or more parties, accompanied by an agreement that the party who wins will obtain a certain payment/profit from the losing party either directly or indirectly. The court, citing Surah Al-Baqarah verse 219, and Surah Al-Maidah verses 90 and 91, also noted that gambling is forbidden according to Islamic law.

The court discussed the application of Islamic law with regards to the first of the five co-accused, who was Christian, not Muslim. The court acknowledged that as the first co-accused had already expressed in her written statement to the court that she had voluntarily submitted to Islamic law, the requirements contained in art 94 of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013 on Criminal Procedure, and art 5(b) of Aceh Qanun No. 6 of 2014 on Criminal Law, that non-Muslims must first voluntarily submit to Islamic law, had been met.

The court also noted that the qanun offered alternative punishments, those being imprisonment, a fine, or caning, and that the prosecution sought caning. The court reasoned that the five co-accused's punishment should be punitive in nature, rather than retributive, and that it should not affect their dignity (martabat). Rather, that it should be pedagogical in nature, encourage the co-accused not to re-offend, and be a lesson for the broader community (tadabbur).

In sentencing each of the five co-accused to nine strokes of the cane, the court took into consideration the time the five co-accused had already spent in prison, as required by art 23(2) of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013, which considers 30 days in prison akin to one stroke of the cane. The court also ruled that, pursuant to art 214(1) of Aceh Qanun No. 7 of 2013, as the five co-accused were at fault they would bear court costs.

Plaintiff Derrick Lafurr Brown, a Muslim inmate confined in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, filed a suit against the Respondents, who were various prison officials at the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, for interrupting the Islamic services [Friday services specified in Islamic ritual law] out of an alleged general bias against Islam. The magistrate judge determined that the prison officials were acting in response to the Plaintiff’s repeated disobedience, and that their measure of standing in the doorway to block entry to the services was related to a legitimate penological interest and therefore did not interfere with the inmate's free exercise of religion. The magistrate judge recommended that the plaintiff's civil rights claims be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Lawmakers in Brunei passed the Syariah Penal Code Order of 2013 in October of that year, and implemented the law in two stages: sections regulating minor crimes and misdemeanors took effect on May 1, 2014, and the remainder—including serious crimes and felonies that entail classical Islamic criminal law’s fixed crimes and punishments—took effect on April 3, 2019. This Islamic criminal code exists in parallel to Brunei’s “civil” (or secular) criminal laws, which borrow from British law. Among other provisions, Brunei’s new code criminalizes failures to perform various religious obligations, sexual relations out of wedlock, and gay or lesbian sexual relations. It includes punishments of whipping, amputation of hands and feet, and stoning. Notably, the most severe punishments accompany very high evidentiary standards as laid out within the Code, and in the related Syariah Courts Criminal Procedure Code Order, the SCCPCO of 2018.

Lawmakers in Brunei passed the Syariah Penal Code Order of 2013 in October of that year, and implemented the law in two stages: sections regulating minor crimes and misdemeanors took effect on May 1, 2014, and the remainder—including serious crimes and felonies that entail classical Islamic criminal law’s fixed crimes and punishments—took effect on April 3, 2019. This Islamic criminal code exists in parallel to Brunei’s “civil” (or secular) criminal laws, which borrow from British law. Among other provisions, Brunei’s new code criminalizes failures to perform various religious obligations, sexual relations out of wedlock, and gay or lesbian sexual relations. It includes punishments of whipping, amputation of hands and feet, and stoning. Notably, the most severe punishments accompany very high evidentiary standards as laid out within the Code, and in the related Syariah Courts Criminal Procedure Code Order, the SCCPCO of 2018.

Brunei’s Second Minister of Foreign Affairs addressed this letter to the Special Procedures Branch of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on April 8, 2019, responding to an April 1, 2019 letter asking that the Syariah Penal Code Order of 2013 be repealed. The letter starts by affirming Brunei’s commitment to international human rights law. It then argues that the Code is acceptable given the local context: Brunei is a small country, Islam has been the official religion for centuries, and religious values underly the Brunein identity, and Brunei has the sovereignty to enforce laws reflecting its cultural and religious values. It also states that the Syariah criminal law system is focused more on prevention than punishment, that the Code does not criminalize any sexual orientations or same-sex relations, and that the most severe punishments require a standard that is so high that it would be extremely difficult to satisfy.

Note: Authors' name is written differently on the cover letter and on the country's official site. In the long form field, his name is written as on the official site.