Ruling on the relatives of a murdered person taking revenge with their own hands
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Your Eminence! A man killed another man and the matter was referred to the state, but the state released this killer. Do the relatives of the murdered man have the right to take revenge on that killer?
The original ruling is that if a man kills a person intentionally and oppressively, with no doubt involved, the original ruling is that the awliya (close friends of Allah) of the murdered person are the ones who kill him;because of the saying of Allah the Exalted: [al-Baqarah: 178] But the scholars say: only the ruler takes charge of this,Meaning: the head of the state or whoever he delegates,And with this, they said: If the awliya (close friends of Allah) of the murdered person wish to carry out the killing themselves and say to the state: We want to kill him, we want to satisfy our grief and quench our thirst for vengeance from this man, they have the right to do so. However, if the state acquits him, they do not have the right to kill him; because that would lead to chaos, and the state does not acquit him except through a Sharia-compliant path.
The questioner: And the state did not clear him rightfully?The Shaykh: I fear that if we say they may kill him, while in reality his blood is not currently protected, his blood is worthless, I fear that if we say that, fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) will occur. So it is obligatory for them to look at the public benefit. If fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) is feared, such as if he is from a tribe and then the tribe rises up against this tribe and blood is shed, the important thing is that they look at what is best.
The original ruling is that if a man kills a person intentionally and oppressively, with no doubt involved, the original ruling is that the awliya (close friends of Allah) of the murdered person are the ones who kill him;because of the saying of Allah the Exalted:
O you who have believed, prescribed for you is legal retribution for those murdered - the free for the free, the slave for the slave, and the female for the female. But whoever overlooks from his brother anything, then there should be a suitable follow-up and payment to him with good conduct
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى الْحُرُّ بِالْحُرِّ وَالْعَبْدُ بِالْعَبْدِ وَالْأُنْثَى بِالْأُنْثَى فَمَنْ عُفِيَ لَهُ مِنْ أَخِيهِ شَيْءٌ فَاتِّبَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَأَدَاءٌ إِلَيْهِ بِإِحْسَانٍThe questioner: And the state did not clear him rightfully?The Shaykh: I fear that if we say they may kill him, while in reality his blood is not currently protected, his blood is worthless, I fear that if we say that, fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) will occur. So it is obligatory for them to look at the public benefit. If fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) is feared, such as if he is from a tribe and then the tribe rises up against this tribe and blood is shed, the important thing is that they look at what is best.