Islamic Propagation Office of Qom Seminary, Khorasan Razavi Branch Journal of Islamic Law and Jurisprudence 2476-7565 10 3 2024 09 22 Distinguishing Functional Analysis in Imāmīyyah Criminal Jurisprudence Distinguishing Functional Analysis in Imāmīyyah Criminal Jurisprudence 67 100 77244 10.22034/jrj.2024.77244 FA Mohammad Morvarid PHD student Mohammadali Hajidehabadi Department of criminal law and criminology University of Qom Journal Article 2024 11 26 An important aspect of the jurisprudential approach to punishments is considering their functions, effects, and consequences. The extent to which these factors can be relied upon in permitting or prohibiting the implementation of a punishment is a significant issue, particularly from the perspective of governmental criminal jurisprudence. Using a descriptive-analytical method, based on legal (sharʻī) sources and the propositions found in the works of jurists, this study aims to take a comprehensive view of this issue. The findings indicate that, in addition to the explicit legal evidence regarding the functions of punishment in general, Islamic jurists have actively employed functional analysis in their critique and examination of punishments. However, while jurists’ perspectives on the purpose of ḥudūd (punishments prescribed by Islamic law) and taʻzīrāt (discretionary penalties) have contributed to the development of functionalism in taʻzīrī punishments to some extent, they have had little impact on ḥudūd punishments. Jurists have also given considerable attention to the negative side effects of ḥadī and taʻzīrī punishments, sometimes even issuing fatwās prohibiting or delaying their implementation due to their harmful effects on individuals or society. Overall, Islamic jurisprudence has significant potential for incorporating functionalist considerations in punishment. However, this important issue has not yet received the scholarly attention and research it deserves. An important aspect of the jurisprudential approach to punishments is considering their functions, effects, and consequences. The extent to which these factors can be relied upon in permitting or prohibiting the implementation of a punishment is a significant issue, particularly from the perspective of governmental criminal jurisprudence. Using a descriptive-analytical method, based on legal (sharʻī) sources and the propositions found in the works of jurists, this study aims to take a comprehensive view of this issue. The findings indicate that, in addition to the explicit legal evidence regarding the functions of punishment in general, Islamic jurists have actively employed functional analysis in their critique and examination of punishments. However, while jurists’ perspectives on the purpose of ḥudūd (punishments prescribed by Islamic law) and taʻzīrāt (discretionary penalties) have contributed to the development of functionalism in taʻzīrī punishments to some extent, they have had little impact on ḥudūd punishments. Jurists have also given considerable attention to the negative side effects of ḥadī and taʻzīrī punishments, sometimes even issuing fatwās prohibiting or delaying their implementation due to their harmful effects on individuals or society. Overall, Islamic jurisprudence has significant potential for incorporating functionalist considerations in punishment. However, this important issue has not yet received the scholarly attention and research it deserves.

http://jostar-fiqh.maalem.ir/article_77244_db44d66bbb6b8a74a3f0d081a7b03192.pdf