ایجاد و توسعه ی صلاحیت های کیفری برای ضابطه مندی مجازات ساب النبی (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
حکم به مجازات ساب النبی، در روایات، فتاوای فقها و قوانین موضوعه، جرم انگاری شده و برای محاکم کیفری، صلاحیت سرزمینی و صلاحیت شخصی (ارتکاب توسط اتباع ایرانی در خارج از قلمرو جزایی) شناسایی شده است. این نحو تحدید صلاحیت محاکم، از یک سو منتج به ظهور «پدیده ی بی کیفری» برای اتباع کشورهای غیراسلامی شده و از سویی دیگر، موجب روی آوری افراد به دادگستری خصوصی و اقدام برای اجرای مجازات گردیده است. چراکه مشهور فقها به سامع (شنونده ی سب النبی)، اذن و حتی در برخی موارد تکلیف به اجرای حکم بر فرد سب کننده را داده اند، امری که نه تنها باعث نادیده گرفتن حقوق دفاعی متهم و دوری از دادرسی عادلانه می گردد، بلکه واجد آثار و تبعات اجتماعی، حقوقی، امنیتی و غیره برای جامعه ی اسلامی و حتی فرد اجراکننده ی حکم می باشد. لذا برای ضابطه مند نمودن اجرای مجازات ساب النبی، ضروری است صلاحیت واقعی مقرر در ماده ی 5 قانون مجازات اسلامی به این جرم نیز توسعه یابد و با وجود اجماع تمامی مذاهب اسلامی بر مجازات ساب النبی، دادگاهی ذیل دیوان بین المللی دادگستری اسلامی، با صلاحیتی بین المللی، برای مجازات توهین کنندگان به پیامبر اسلام تشکیل گردد.Establishment and Expansion of Criminal Jurisdiction for the Legal Regulation of the Punishment for Insulting the Prophet (Sabb al-nabi)
The criminalization of insulting the Prophet Muhammad, known as sabb al-nabi , is firmly established in Islamic tradition, juristic fatwas, and codified legal systems. This act is regarded as a punishable offense, with both territorial and personal jurisdiction conferred upon domestic courts, including extraterritorial jurisdiction over Iranian nationals who commit the offense outside Iran’s penal territory. However, the jurisdictional limitations of current legal frameworks have led to notable legal and practical challenges. On one hand, these limitations have created a de facto impunity for nationals of non-Islamic states who commit the offense beyond the reach of Islamic legal systems. On the other hand, the absence of an effective legal remedy has, in some cases, led individuals to engage in acts of private justice, including extrajudicial executions. This phenomenon is partly rooted in the views of several prominent Islamic jurists, who maintain that under certain conditions, any Muslim who witnesses the offense may be religiously obligated to carry out the prescribed punishment immediately. These interpretations, grounded in the perceived severity and irreparability of the offense, raise serious legal, ethical, and security concerns. Such actions undermine the accused’s right to a fair trial and the procedural safeguards of due process, posing threats to public order, judicial authority, and the rule of law. Moreover, extrajudicial responses expose perpetrators to criminal liability under both domestic and international law, risking prosecution, imprisonment, or capital punishment depending on the jurisdiction involved. These legal and social ramifications necessitate the development of a lawful, structured, and predictable mechanism for addressing sabb al-nabi offenses. To that end, a twofold legal reform is proposed. First, it is recommended that Article 5 of Iran’s Islamic Penal Code be revised to explicitly include sabb al-nabi under its scope of extraterritorial jurisdiction. Article 5 currently permits prosecution of crimes committed abroad by Iranian nationals when the act is criminal under Iranian law. Expanding its scope to include any act—regardless of the perpetrator’s nationality or location—that insults the Prophet would address the current jurisdictional void and empower domestic courts to prosecute such offenses effectively. Second, given the consensus among Islamic legal schools on the gravity of sabb al-nabi and the necessity of punishment, the establishment of a specialized international court under the auspices of an Islamic organization—such as a proposed Islamic International Court of Justice—is essential. This tribunal would possess international jurisdiction to adjudicate cases of blasphemy against the Prophet Muhammad, irrespective of the accused’s nationality or country of residence. Such a court would ensure that justice is administered according to Islamic legal principles and within the framework of due process, thereby deterring both impunity and vigilante action. An international mechanism of this kind would also harmonize the legal responses of Islamic nations, enhance intergovernmental cooperation, and provide a unified framework for prosecuting religious offenses that transcend national borders. It would serve as a legitimate and authoritative institution capable of addressing blasphemy in a manner consistent with both the rule of law and the spiritual values of the Muslim world. Institutionalizing the prosecution of sabb al-nabi would reaffirm the commitment of Islamic legal systems to justice, fairness, and procedural integrity. It would also demonstrate the capacity of Muslim-majority states to address religious offenses through formal legal mechanisms rather than through personal retaliation or mob violence—practices that often result in unlawful killings, international criticism, and diplomatic tensions. In conclusion, although the offense of insulting the Prophet is criminalized under Islamic law and recognized in several national legal systems, the absence of comprehensive jurisdiction—especially concerning non-citizens and extraterritorial acts—creates significant enforcement challenges. This legal gap fosters both impunity and the dangerous rise of private justice, each incompatible with the principles of Islamic jurisprudence and modern criminal law. Accordingly, it is essential to: (1) amend domestic laws to enable universal jurisdiction over sabb al-nabi , and (2) establish a competent international Islamic tribunal with full procedural safeguards. These reforms would enhance the effectiveness of religious offense prosecution, reinforce the authority of judicial systems, mitigate the misuse of religious sentiments, and contribute to both social and international stability
تبلیغات
