Rape in Islam

So, recently we are "surprised," to say the least, that a man who was once so influential in Malaysian politics made a controversial statement regarding Islamic hudud. I am no scholar nor well-versed when it comes to Islamic jurisprudence, but I am intrigued by one little fragment of his speech, something about a rape victim who needs to produce four witnesses in order to make a report. As soon as I heard it, I was baffled - does a raped woman really have to produce four witnesses in order to make a report? That would be unjust! Because if she had not been able to produce those witnesses, then she would be punished, and the man who raped her would be free.

So, I made some research in some websites that discussed the Islamic point of view in a case of rape. Well, guess what, who would think that a politician who was so respected because of his eloquent way of thinking would make blind comparison between rape and adultery. In Islam, in making a report on an adultery case, four witnesses need to be produced and such claim that fails to be backed up with witnesses are punished as false allegations. But it is not the same with rape.

There was one instance that happened in the time of Prophet PBUH where a woman was raped and brought to the Prophet in order to be judged. There were no witnesses to back up her claim and the man was caught and asked if he really did that to her. That man confessed and prosecuted and the woman was released. Granted, the man confessed, but the point made is that there were actually no witnesses needed to make such claim of being raped.

Some of you skeptics might ask: Then, what if the man does not confess? Does Islam have to punish the woman because she made a false allegation? The answer is no. The politician who made the statement made it sound like it was the worst law that ever existed because of the harshness. However, one needs to understand that in Islam, doubt trumps almost anything. When in the process of judging someone, even if there is a reason to doubt that a person who is claimed to commit a wrongdoing, might not do it in anyway, punishment should be postponed or held back altogether. In short, the reason not to punish is always stronger than the reason to punish. In the case of rape, it is practiced that the testimony of the woman alone can release her from punishment.

Islam, again, is a compassionate religion. While it is firm in the implementation of law, it is very considerate when it comes to unique case across individuals. While stealing might ensue in the cutting off of hand (which might sound very harsh), but again there might be reasons that could withdraw the decision to cut off the thief's hand, like poverty, or even the amount of the stolen goods, and many more. It depends on the context and circumstances at which the crime occurs. To say, "If you want to drink human hand soup, go to a place where it cuts off thieves' hands," is very uncalled for and just lacks the necessary knowledge until such statement could be made.

Especially in the modern world, we have advanced scientific (physical and psychological) knowledge to know if someone is raped. Medically, there is a difference between intercourse made willingly or in force. We have this knowledge, so if the testimony of the woman is not enough, then we can use these scientific procedures to back up her claim. Forensic psychologists can be employed to analyze the situation psychologically and can even make attempts to scientifically estimate who the rapist is.

So, there you go, for the sake of humanity, I really hope there is no such thing as blind statement when it comes to controversial issues like religions and their laws. It is sad really because rather than being professional about it, there is a hint that you are being personal (as seen from the lack of knowledge but still has the gut to say anything about it).