Follow-ups and activities of international and national organizations:

Throughout history, international organizations have made numerous efforts and pursued various actions to curb the oppressive judicial system of the Islamic Republic of Iran. However, unfortunately, due to the lack of an enforcement mechanism, these efforts were not able to compel the Iranian regime to respect human rights. Most of the activities of these organizations, both foreign and domestic, have been fruitless, and until they are able to hold their members accountable and ensure the implementation and observance of human rights principles, there will be no progress in curbing oppressive and tyrannical regimes like the Islamic Republic of Iran.

International Amnesty Organization – Human Rights Defenders Group in Mehr month of 1385 (October 2006), with the release of a press statement, asked the Iranian government to remove stoning from Iran’s criminal laws. Coinciding with the release of this statement, a delegation from the Iranian parliament met with the Women and Gender Equality Committee of the European Parliament in Brussels. Elham Aminzadeh, Vice Chairman of the National Security Commission of Iran, told ISNA news agency in this regard: “The document of this European parliamentary committee is online and is not credible for us.”

According to statistics from Amnesty International, 77 cases of stoning have been recorded since the beginning of the authoritarian regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran. It is clear that due to the censorship and security measures in place in Iran, and the lack of accurate reporting, the number of stoning victims is even higher.

1- ISNA News Agency, dated October 2006.
2- The first case of stoning in Iran after the 1979 Revolution took place in Kerman city in July 1980, where a man and a woman were stoned to death by stoning (rajm).

Contradiction between the Islamic Republic of Iran’s claimed membership in international human rights organizations and the regime’s despotic and life-threatening actions.

This issue has been obvious during the decades of despotic rule of the Islamic Republic of Iran; a regime that, despite its membership in human rights organizations, acts against human rights and always denies its own oppressive actions and lies, which this article aims to report in detail and separately, so that the investigation and report will be as extensive as possible. However, to summarize the issue, the regime’s non-committal membership in several fundamental human rights organizations will be mentioned:

• Iran’s membership in Amnesty International and its emphasis on the commitment of member governments to human rights obligations.

• Iran’s membership in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the emphasis of this covenant on not carrying out executions, prohibiting torture and inhuman and degrading treatment, and cruel and inhuman punishment.

• Iran’s membership in the United Nations – Human Rights Commission; an organization that has advocated for the limitation of the death penalty to only the most heinous crimes! These crimes have been defined in United Nations resolutions and it is added that the death penalty should be an exceptional measure.

Part Two

A jurisprudential examination of the crime of adultery with the punishment of stoning (until death).

What is understood from the interpretations (hermeneutics) of religious texts and religion is that religion, through its messengers, has come to free humans from the chains and shackles (superstitious customs, oppressive and degrading laws and morals) that have been imposed on weak humans. (Verse 157, Surah Al-A’raf)

And since this subject is a religious program, it has been confirmed in all religions and has always followed the method of commanding good and forbidding evil to combat ignorance, oppression, and exploitation in primitive and oppressed societies. In order to bring minds closer to this subject, we refer to past examples of these chains and shackles in intellectual and social forms such as superstitions, backwardness, discrimination, and class exploitation.

• Slavery and buying slaves

• Cutting off a part of the shirt that has become impure, or a part of the body that has been contaminated.

  (1) “من از تو متشکرم”

  “I am grateful to you.”

  In the primary tribes

• Blood revenge and retribution in all cases of murder, whether intentional or accidental, whether it is a matter of life or death.

• Cutting off the hands of a thief, or if they do not pay the ransom and penalty and return the stolen goods and make a pledge by oath to never steal again, they will be thrown into the Nile river to be devoured by crocodiles (ancient Egypt).

• Throwing the adulterous woman into the Nile River to be devoured by a crocodile and whipping the male adulterer one hundred times.

• Execution for grave robbers and cemeteries.

• Execution of the criminal family and confiscation of their assets and the assets of their family and associates, similar to the punishment of Achan in the time of Joshua in Israel.

• Burying and killing the deceased woman and children together so that they may continue their lives together in the afterlife.

And other superstitious, cruel, and degrading punishments and laws that have existed throughout the history of human social life, and have been mentioned separately in all nations and human races on all continents of the earth.

• Stoning of adulterers, especially and some other crimes generally.

These physical and moral chains have been present in societies for reasons that correspond to the growth of human intelligence, even until centuries after the birth of Christ (595 AD). Unfortunately, brutal punishments were imposed and continued until the 18th century. In order to prepare and bring minds closer to examining the religious foundations of stoning, it is necessary to also mention this period; for example, Pope Gregory I recommended the following punishments until death for the following crimes:

• Being punished by being put on the wheel for pride.

• The punishment of throwing someone into ice water as revenge.

• The punishment for eating mice, lizards, and snakes out of greed and desire.

• The punishment for playing with fire is throwing into the fire.

• The punishment of burning at the stake for sorcerers (alchemists and scientists) in a way that even Protestants between the 15th and 18th centuries in Europe burned one hundred thousand women alive as witches.

• The punishment of being torn apart alive for anger.

• Punishment for throwing into the snake’s nest for laziness.

• The punishment of wearing an iron muzzle for women who talked too much.

Death penalty by drowning and burying alive for witches (in 1692) in the Massachusetts Bay on the east coast of America was only due to “dreaming” against the accused.

Historical background of stoning (death by stoning) punishment in other religious and ancient texts:

• In the Sumerian tablets, more than 7000 years ago, it is written: “…and a woman who commits adultery with two men must be stoned to death.” (Alireza Bahmani – History of Stoning)

• In the laws of Hammurabi, approximately 4000 years ago, there was a mention of drowning as a punishment for adulterous women.

• The punishment of stoning is clearly mentioned in the Torah for many crimes such as witchcraft, blasphemy, idolatry, and especially for adultery. (Arabic Torah – p. 217 – Chapter 22)

• The stoning law in the Gospel, since Christ did not bring a new law and was a supporter and preacher of the law of Moses, the prophet of the children of Israel, therefore according to the previous law, they would act upon this law (stoning). The story of the Pharisee woman and her stoning by the Pharisees and its account in the Gospel is famous and well-documented.

• Stoning and flogging in Islam, (this section of the article aims to examine its jurisprudential foundations) has no jurisprudential basis or evidence that will be mentioned, and there is no mention of this heinous and terrifying punishment in the Quran.

• Stoning and execution in the late and contemporary era of human society, in the first part of this writing, which is appropriate, and related to the despotic rulers of Iran, from all the systems that believe in stoning, was mentioned and it is clear that repeating it in this section is irrelevant.

The legal system in Iran relies on religious and legal justifications for the punishment of stoning to death for adultery.

• According to the alleged verse of stoning, which is not present in the Quran.

“If the man and woman commit adultery, then punish them both as ordained by God, for God is Mighty and Wise.”

“If the man and woman commit adultery, then they have fulfilled their desire!”

• According to the narrations that have reported incidents of stoning, such as the narrations of “Ma’az bin Malik”, “Al-Ghamidiyah”, and “Al-‘Asif”.

• The verse of light, verse (2), is not abrogating the verse of stoning, it is rather specifying it. This is because with the coming of the verse of light, the punishment of stoning has effectively abrogated any previous ruling, but they consider this abrogation as a specification, meaning that stoning is only for those who are not married and death by stoning is for those who are married!

Rejection of the argument and evidence of the Iranian judicial system regarding stoning as punishment for adultery.

In order to reject, we must mention sufficient reasons, but these reasons are usually lengthy and tiresome. Therefore, we were forced to mention the concept of “conflicting opinions” in order to maintain the scientific framework in this writing. We have tried to avoid bringing up details of “he said, she said” as much as possible, as it would make the text long and tedious. However, in order to address this issue, we have made an effort to mention the source and reasoning behind our arguments, so that the reader can follow and pursue it if they desire a more detailed explanation.

A. The verse about the false accusation of stoning in the Quran.

The claim of the verse of stoning is against the subject of preserving the Quran from God’s side, which says that we have revealed the Quran and we protect and preserve it well and correctly. (Surah Al-Hijr, verse 9)

“Of course, the Mu’tazilites and followers of the system (with the emphasis on “z” and the opening of “n” 160/231 Q from the students of Hisham ibn Hakam) also consider the lack of mention of them in the Quran as evidence of the illegality of stoning, knowing that they believe in the allocation and limitation of the Quran through hadiths and not abrogation.”

2- Ali (RA) in a hadith has distinguished stoning (rajm) from the practice of the Tazians, and did not attribute it to the Quran (Sahih Bujari, volume 8, book 82, number 803). The Khawarij during the time of Ali (may Allah honor his face) also did not accept stoning as a punishment. Even now, all their jurisprudential methods, such as the Ibadiyyah and others, do not consider stoning as an Islamic ruling. Therefore, they reject stoning (Sheikh al-Islam Fakhr al-Din Razi). Their argument was that the punishment of stoning is not mentioned in the apparent text of the Quran, and it is not mentioned in the continuous tradition of the Prophet.

• Literary eloquence and rhetoric in the Qur’an, as an interpreter and hermeneutist, consider the context and sentence structure of the verse of stoning to be very simple and artificial. This is because the “fa” of punishment in the phrase “fārajmūhumā” (stone them) is mentioned without any rhetorical or literary reason. This is because when mentioning conditional particles, the “fa” of punishment does not come, but when the condition is fulfilled, the “fa” of punishment appears without any conditional particles, such as:

“The adulteress and the adulterer, flog each of them with a hundred lashes.” (Quran 24:2)

(1) “سلام، من از ایران هستم. امیدوارم حالتون خوب باشه.”

“Hello, I am from Iran. I hope you are doing well.”

Therefore, the context of the phrase “false verse” does not read with eloquence and rhetoric, and it indicates the artificiality of the phrase.

• The verses of the Quran were revealed as inspiration to the reporters and scribes who were compiling it, and to prevent any distortion, there were hundreds of Quran memorizers, just like there are today. None of them forgot or omitted a single verse, neither in memorization nor recitation.

• From a legal perspective, it does not coincide with other religious rulings, because with the condition of old age, which is mentioned in the verse of stoning, if an adulterer has any other condition (besides old age), they will be stoned.

B) Responding to hadiths such as “Ma’az bin Malik”, “Ghamidiyah”, and “Asif” which report incidents of stoning, these three hadiths are among a total of ten hadiths that discuss stoning. (Of course, there are many hadiths about stoning, but their narrations can be traced back to ten hadiths.)

(1) “بهترین راه برای رسیدن به موفقیت، انجام دادن کارهایی است که دیگران نمی‌توانند انجام دهند.”

“The best way to achieve success is by doing things that others cannot do.”

1- These hadiths, regardless of their narrative and documentation, if we consider them correct based on the principles of narration, the problem with them is the hadith of “Asif” which is narrated by Al-Zuhri, one of the followers, and he is the only one who narrates it and no one else in that class narrates this hadith. And because it is unique and solitary in its narration, it is considered for its validity and credibility, and all the hadiths after these ten hadiths are related to other classes that are narrated by the narrators of hadiths (a chain of narrators from one narrator, not several narrators at the same time). The hadith in this class (followers) is unique and a solitary hadith is not considered reliable by the people of hadith.

2- In addition, we have hadiths that discuss the methods of proving the hadith of stoning (stoning someone to death), which the Prophet did not actually carry out in certain incidents. Instead, he implemented the punishment of flogging and banishment, as narrated by Malik from Zaid ibn Aslam, where a man confessed to committing adultery against himself and the Prophet, after addressing any doubts, was compelled to carry out the punishment and ordered for the man to be flogged. However, the flogging was to be done in a way that would not cause injury, tear the skin, or allow the hand of the person administering the punishment to go under the armpit of the person being punished. The flogging was also to be done in a non-continuous manner (with breaks in between strikes) and with a moderate force, neither too severe nor too light.

3- And more importantly, this hadith means that traditions and customs can be abrogated by the Quran, just as many of the Prophet’s rulings were abrogated after the revelation of certain verses, such as the prohibition of taking prisoners during war (the Battle of Badr) and the change of qibla from Jerusalem to the Kaaba after the Prophet had been praying towards Jerusalem for 16 years. And also, like the stoning punishment which was replaced by lashes through the verse 2 of Surah An-Nur.

On the contrary, verses are not abrogated by tradition, even though some jurists may permit it. It is not abrogation in essence, but rather specification. In reality, there is no event during the implementation of religious rulings that would abrogate the tradition of the Quran.

5- Shaybani narrates that I asked Abdullah ibn Jafar, “Did the Messenger of God carry out stoning as a punishment?” He answered, “Yes.” I asked, “Before the revelation of Surah An-Nur or after?” He replied, “I do not know.” (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 82, Hadith 804)

6- The mention of stoning is only found in the shared narrations of the two groups, and it does not pay attention to the qualities of the narration – it does not provide any evidence for it. This is because there are many rare, strange, strange, weak, unknown and false narrations that are not mentioned among the shared narrations and hadith communities; this is a common and clear matter among the people of hadith that through the means and rules of “criticism and evaluation”, correct narrations are distinguished from incorrect ones.

It is said that the verse of light refers to the verse of stoning.

1- The claim that the verse of stoning has no external evidence, as mentioned before, and for the same reason, the claim of preserving the Quran by God and the existence of a verse with an abrogated recitation and a remaining ruling, is not considered a divine statement of preservation and protection of the Quran.

2- Therefore, the reasoning of the judicial system in Iran is based on the same level as tradition and hadith, and in the real world of the implementation of our religious laws, we do not have an event that has abrogated the tradition and hadith of the Quran. Yes, among the “Ahnaf”, repeated tradition assigns verses, and this assignment is clearly not abrogation.

Chapter 24, Verse 2 of the Quran states: “The adulterers should be punished with a hundred lashes.” The abrogator of our tradition was present before, just as the Quran has come as the basis for abrogating the mental, superstitious, and moral chains of societies. However, gradually and step by step, it has been implemented in the situation of revolutionary laws and abrogation of conservative and reactionary laws. Even the setting of gradual and necessary laws can be seen in the Jewish narrative of “Bar-Saya” in Fadak. When the Prophet was asked about the punishment for adulterers by two Jews, he committed to giving the correct answer and replied: “Yes, the punishment of stoning to death was in the Torah, but when there was a dispute between two similar accused, rich and poor (change in circumstances), they would turn it into a flogging and parade them in the city for humiliation.”

Note: Even during the late period of Judaism before Christ, the groundwork for changing this rule had gradually been laid, and in the time of Islam, it was decisively abrogated by verse 2 of Surah Nur. This is a well-known method in religions for changing the chains and shackles of societal thoughts and morals. However, this prominent example is a significant and debatable topic for research in the field of legal rights, known as “the gradual establishment of religious laws.”