Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Islamic Criminal Justice

Islamic Criminal Justice Letters to the Editor From Gamal M. Badr There is more acrimonious attack than constructive criticism in Ann Elizabeth Mayer's review of The Islamic Criminal Justice Sys­ tem in the Spring 1983 issue of the Journal. What I find most dis­ turbing is Mayer's selective emphasis on aspects of classical Islamic law not necessarily related to criminal justice and which have mostly fallen into desuetude. She mentions (at 365) "the numerous [discriminatory] distinctions which classical Islamic law requires between Muslim and non-Muslim . . . , free and slave, male and fe­ male, and high born and low born", as if such provisions (although I am not sure what she means by the last mentioned distinction) were peculiar to classical Islamic law and should cast it, alone among the legal systems of the world, in an unfavorable light. One need not go back to Roman law or to Jewish law for parallels. Pre- nineteenth century European law and pre-Emancipation and even pre-Civil Rights U.S. law are replete which such "distinctions". Need any common lawyer be reminded that it was only in 1829 that the British Parliament repealed the major disabilities affecting Catholics and that some other disabilities were not http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Comparative Law Oxford University Press

Islamic Criminal Justice

Badr, Gamal M.
American Journal of Comparative Law , Volume 32 (1) – Jan 1, 1984
Download PDF
3 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/islamic-criminal-justice-2bH0rGAkX7

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© 1984 by The American Society of Comparative Law, Inc.
ISSN
0002-919X
eISSN
2326-9197
DOI
10.2307/840274
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Letters to the Editor From Gamal M. Badr There is more acrimonious attack than constructive criticism in Ann Elizabeth Mayer's review of The Islamic Criminal Justice Sys­ tem in the Spring 1983 issue of the Journal. What I find most dis­ turbing is Mayer's selective emphasis on aspects of classical Islamic law not necessarily related to criminal justice and which have mostly fallen into desuetude. She mentions (at 365) "the numerous [discriminatory] distinctions which classical Islamic law requires between Muslim and non-Muslim . . . , free and slave, male and fe­ male, and high born and low born", as if such provisions (although I am not sure what she means by the last mentioned distinction) were peculiar to classical Islamic law and should cast it, alone among the legal systems of the world, in an unfavorable light. One need not go back to Roman law or to Jewish law for parallels. Pre- nineteenth century European law and pre-Emancipation and even pre-Civil Rights U.S. law are replete which such "distinctions". Need any common lawyer be reminded that it was only in 1829 that the British Parliament repealed the major disabilities affecting Catholics and that some other disabilities were not

Journal

American Journal of Comparative Law – Oxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 1984

There are no references for this article.