The Impact of Harms on the Implementation of Fixed Punishments

The questioner:
The issue of the matter: Are there any public benefits that justify not implementing the fixed punishment? That is, benefits that change the ruling regarding the implementation of the fixed punishment.

The Shaykh:
Not implementing the fixed punishment, is that it?

The questioner:
That is, he claimed that implementing the fixed punishment on a specific person, or at a specific time, involves harms, so he refrains from implementing it.

The Shaykh:
Yes, if implementing the fixed punishment leads to a greater harm, the greater harm is averted. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) did not implement the fixed punishment on Ibn Abi, he did not implement the fixed punishment on Ibn Abi for his false accusation of the Mother of the Believers, because he had a group and people who would avenge him, and they had a strong sense of tribal loyalty. So if the fixed punishment had been implemented on him, a greater harm would have occurred. Therefore, the fixed punishment was not implemented on Ibn Abi, even though it was implemented on other Muslims. This was averted in order to avert the greater harm.
Likewise, if the Muslims are on a military expedition, in the land of the enemy, the Muslims are on a military expedition, in the land of the enemy, implementing the fixed punishment on one of the soldiers would result in harm, it would result in harm, so the fixed punishment is not implemented in this case. Likewise, theft during a time of famine, theft during a time of famine, if there is severe hunger, the fixed punishment for theft is not implemented during this period because of the doubt in these matters and the dire necessity for him to take what sustains his life. 'Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) prevented the implementation of the fixed punishment for theft in the Year of the Ash, meaning the year of hunger. Yes.