Debate rages in Algeria over proposed death penalty ban
2009-01-29
Algerian clerics and human rights groups are locked in a vigorous debate over a death penalty ban proposed by Parliament. While the law allows it, Algeria has not executed a prisoner since 1993.
By Said Jameh for Magharebia in Algiers – 29/01/09
 [Said Jameh] Cheikh Abderehmane Chibane of the Algerian Association of Muslim Scholars says a ban on the death penalty would be a "big mistake." |
Debate is heating up in Algeria between clerics and human rights activists over a proposed ban on capital punishment in the country. Religious leaders accuse legislators of denying society a punitive measure prescribed in the Qur'an, while supporters of the ban believe the death penalty is a human rights issue and should not be approached from a religious or philosophical perspective.
The controversy began when the opposition Rally for Culture and Democracy (RCD) proposed the legislation, and worsened when the National Consultative Committee for Promotion and Protection of Human Rights (CNCPPDH) organised a two-day meeting on January 12th-13th between clerics and human rights advocates.
Discussion from both sides has been carried widely by the Algerian press. Human rights activist Kamel Rezak Bara called for the abolition of the death penalty, citing a de facto moratorium in place in the country for many years. While judges continue to issue the death sentence – particularly in cases related to terrorism – Algeria has not executed a prisoner since 1993.
Bara called on judges to suspend their use of the death sentence, resorting instead to life in prison for existing capital crimes.
Algeria was the only Arab nation to vote in favour of United Nations General Assembly Resolution 62/149 of 2007, which called for a moratorium on executions. In the Maghreb, Libya and Mauritania opposed the initiative and Morocco abstained from the vote, while Tunisia was absent.
Farouk Ksentini, chief of the CNCPPDH, said capital punishment is outdated. "The abolition of the death penalty doesn't mean the release of the criminal", he said. "The penalty will be replaced with another one that makes him or her pay for the crimes committed."
Ksentini said Algeria's existing death penalty laws harm the nation's reputation in international circles, and that it prevents the extradition of wanted criminals from certain Western countries.
This opinion was shared by Boujemaa Ghechir, President of the non-governmental National League for the Defence of Human Rights. "We shouldn't deal with criminals as if they were demons or angels", he said. "Instead, we should deal with them as human beings."
Ghechir said criminals are still human beings, and may have committed their crimes under the influence of external factors. Therefore, he contends, opting for the death penalty is unjust.
These arguments outraged Cheikh Abderehmane Chibane, head of the Algerian Association of Muslim Scholars. He said punishment by death is mentioned in the text of the Qur'an and Sunna, and "whoever thinks that a man-made judgment is better and more suitable than God's judgment has become an infidel and may not be buried in Muslim graves."
He added, "God created man and He knows what is better for man. Those who claim that the death penalty is outdated are making a big mistake."
The president's Supreme Islamic Council issued an opinion balancing both sides' arguments. It confirmed that the Qur'an lists five instances where the death penalty is to be applied.
"However, the utmost effort must be made to avoid issuing the death penalty, because the human soul is given by God and He alone has the right to take it back", said Council member Mahfoud Smati.
He said the death penalty should be the last resort, and that room must be given for ijtihad, especially as God Almighty advocates reconciliation through the payment of wergild before resorting to violence.
Acknowledging the complexity of the death penalty debate, Farouk Ksentini suggested putting the issue to a popular referendum. The government has yet to state its official position; Justice Minister Taib Belaiz said merely that the issue is not a priority for the government at the present time.
Email to a friend
Print version
Hamza Posted 2009-01-30
Criminals should die....shoot them
Omar El Kindaoui Posted 2009-02-01
Chibane did his reading as he was certainly authorised to do, but it is just ONE reading, and he should know it. One cannot make use of a text in a partial way like he did. This form of assurance, wherein some people allow themselves to invest in blameworthy subjectivism, can only remind us of the immense responsibility the Foukaha had in the decline of our mentality and in the backsliding that followed in the Maghreb and elsewhere (but, most especially, in the Maghreb). In the present (meaning the 21st Century), what is so shocking about gargling down a "dixit magister", both austere and unbalanced, when we know that their character has not always been what they profess it is now. We do not sit with impunity on this seat, which is presently chilled by “Senhadji, The Superb and Unequalled”. This is, without a doubt, because of his fear of being to blame before God on Judgement Day and having to realise that he has reacted so timidly! But, may he be reassured, since he has been appointed by public authority and not by the community of believers, that he has nothing to fear. He is not to blame for this! Far from it!
houssem algerien Posted 2009-02-01
I side with religion.
moimeme Posted 2009-02-02
I ask but one question to these defenders of human rights: Given the costs, why do you want to abolish the death sentence under the pretext that it is outdated? Even if life is always life, being that God created it, a murderer is always an evildoer unless he was defending himself. (“Self-defence” is protected by law.) The rights of humanity come before the rights of the human. Society has the right to live in peace, and crimes that go unpunished make the act of murder commonplace. If a person does not receive punishment of the same type as his sin, then he will attempt to commit the act of murder many times over. But, if he knew that this act was severely punished, he would not dare to commit the heinous crime. The Lord said “Those who kill a soul are as those who killed all of humanity, and those who give life to a soul are as those who give life to all of humanity.” Logic says that life is given by the Creator for his beings, why then save a murderer from death when he has allowed himself to take the lives of others. Without giving any valid arguments, the defenders of human rights consider polygamy outdated, capital punishment outdated, jihad outdated. I do not know what to say to these people who do not advance a single valid argument to justify their heinous crime. I would say an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and a nose for a nose, because the injury is the reward of the first who is guilty. If he will not be punished in like to his heinous crime, then he will attempt it again. Life would become a jungle, and facts confirm this. That has been told at the level of individuals, but will also hold true between nations and societies if the Hebrew state is not stopped by the resistance.
Caudron Posted 2009-02-05
Being neither a Muslim, nor an Algerian, I am certainly not qualified to express my opinion, but, I do wonder about the meaning of the first qualifier, “merciful”, given to Allah. In France, one of the last people sentenced to death did not commit a murder, but was held as an accomplice to murder. Another one of the last people to be executed is also subject to serious doubt about whether he murdered a child. Yet, still in France, a certain number of murderers have never been sentenced because they committed unsolved murders. A hundred years ago, Georges Clémenceau, one of our greatest men, showed himself in favour of the death sentence, asking the “murderers to start first”. This is to say: how many arguments date back to the first discussion on the subject? I am totally opposed to the death sentence, and I do not found this on anyone whosoever’s arguments; I am against the death penalty because I am pro-human.
طارق (بجاية) Posted 2009-02-10
Are you shunning the rule of God, denying it and not abiding by it? It is then the great apostasy and treason of the book and religion of God (enter Islam and you will be safe).
We welcome your comments on Magharebia's articles.
It is our hope that you will use this forum to interact with other readers across the Maghreb. In order to keep this experience interesting, we ask you to follow the rules outlined in the comments policy. By submitting comments, you are consenting to these rules. While Magharebia.com encourages discussion on all subjects, including sensitive ones, the comments posted are solely the views of those submitting them. Magharebia.com does not necessarily endorse or agree with the ideas, views, or opinions voiced in these comments. This is a moderated forum. Comments deemed abusive, offensive, or those containing profanity may not be published.
Magharebia's Comments Policy