The Pillars and Conditions of the Role of Society in Crime Prevention in Islamic Law and Common Law

Abstract

In this paper, we will present the pillars of the community's role in combating criminal acts and their conditions, whether undertaken by individuals as their duty or by those assigned by the state to fulfill its responsibilities. It can be said that the pillars of the community's role in combating crime are four: the crime itself, the one who combats the crime, the criminal, and the means by which the community combats criminal acts but first three pillars will be discussed in this article. Each of these four pillars has specific conditions that must be met to allow the community to play a role in combating criminal acts.

This paper examines the conditions of crime (Al-Munkar) in Islamic jurisprudence as outlined by Imam Al-Ghazali. He identified four essential conditions that must be met before an act can be condemned and corrective measures applied. These conditions ensure that enjoining good and forbidding evil is carried out with justice, wisdom, and adherence to Islamic ethical standards.

The first condition requires that the crime must be occurring at the time of admonishment, ensuring immediate and relevant intervention. The second condition states that the act must be an actual wrongdoing, distinguishing between prohibited actions (Al-Munkar) and sinful acts (Al-Ma’siyah) to maintain legal and moral clarity. The third condition mandates that the wrongdoing must be evident without spying, upholding privacy and preventing unwarranted intrusion. This aligns with Quranic injunctions and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), emphasizing social harmony. The fourth condition asserts that the prohibition of a reprehensible act must be based on established knowledge, not personal interpretation (ijtihad), preventing unwarranted accusations and ensuring condemnation is rooted in clear religious evidence.

This article discusses the conditions for justifiable defense against aggression in substantive law and the principles of combating crime in Islamic jurisprudence. In substantive law, justifiable defense requires three conditions: the existence of an aggressive act constituting a crime, the imminence of the crime, and the reality of the danger. Defense is permissible against acts considered criminal, even if the perpetrator is excused due to insanity or other barriers. However, defense is not justified against lawful actions, such as disciplinary measures or official duties.

In Islamic jurisprudence, combating crime is rooted in the principles of enjoining good and forbidding evil. Key conditions for individuals engaging in this duty include faith, puberty, sanity, capability, and knowledge of Islamic rulings. Faith is essential, as it motivates the individual to uphold justice and religious values. Capability involves the physical and intellectual ability to act against wrongdoing, while knowledge ensures adherence to Sharia principles. Jurists debate additional conditions, such as justice, the permission of the Imam, and gender. Some argue that justice and Imam's permission are not prerequisites, while others emphasize their importance. Regarding gender, while some jurists restrict women from this duty, others, like the Hanafis, permit it based on historical precedents and Quranic principles.

Islamic jurisprudence views criminals as individuals who have deviated from the right path, emphasizing rehabilitation over revenge. Punishments aim to deter and purify, preserving dignity and guiding offenders back to righteousness. Combating crime is a societal obligation, focusing on preventing wrongdoing while considering both divine and human rights. Special relationships may influence methods but do not negate the duty to enjoin good and forbid evil.