"Blood Money" for Raymond Davis?

Whatever happened to “Millions for defense, not a penny for tribute?”

U.S. could resort to Sharia “blood money” provision to try to free U.S. agent imprisoned in Pakistan

Raymond Davis


The Islamic principle of qisas, or retaliation, allows for blood money (diyya) to be paid by the perpetrator to the relatives of the deceased in cases of accidental death or even murder. This is not just an Islamic ritual; it is part of Islamic law and suffices as punishment for the murder if the relatives of the deceased agree.

In any case, the amount of compensation required is higher if the victim was a Muslim than if he was a non-Muslim. Only the Hanafi school of Islamic jurisprudence allows for the possibility of capital punishment in the case of a Muslim who has murdered an unbeliever. The Maliki and Hanbali schools set a Muslim’s life as worth twice that of a non-Muslim. The Shafi’i school sets a Jew’s or Christian’s life as worth two-thirds that of a Muslim. Polytheists are valued less. The Shafi’i Sharia manual ‘Umdat al-Salik dictates: “The indemnity for the death or injury of a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man. The indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth that of a Muslim.” (o4.9)

The Iranian Shi’ite Sufi Sheikh Sultanhussein Tabandeh explains: “Thus if [a] Muslim commits adultery his punishment is 100 lashes, the shaving of his head, and one year of banishment. But if the man is not a Muslim and commits adultery with a Muslim woman his penalty is execution…Similarly if a Muslim deliberately murders another Muslim he falls under the law of retaliation and must by law be put to death by the next of kin. But if a non-Muslim who dies at the hand of a Muslim has by lifelong habit been a non-Muslim, the penalty of death is not valid. Instead the Muslim murderer must pay a fine and be punished with the lash….Since Islam regards non-Muslims as on a lower level of belief and conviction, if a Muslim kills a non-Muslim…then his punishment must not be the retaliatory death, since the faith and conviction he possesses is loftier than that of the man slain…Again, the penalties of a non-Muslim guilty of fornication with a Muslim woman are augmented because, in addition to the crime against morality, social duty and religion, he has committed sacrilege, in that he has disgraced a Muslim and thereby cast scorn upon the Muslims in general, and so must be executed….Islam and its peoples must be above the infidels, and never permit non-Muslims to acquire lordship over them.” — Sultanhussein Tabandeh, A Muslim Commentary on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

So how much blood money will be required for a kuffar CIA agent?

“U.S., Pakistan could use a Muslim ritual to resolve Raymond Davis case,” by David Ignatius in the Washington Post, March 2 (thanks to Creeping Sharia):

One way out of the mess surrounding the Jan. 27 arrest in Lahore of CIA contractor Raymond Davis, say senior U.S. and Pakistani officials, is a Muslim ritual for resolving disputes known as “blood money.”This approach would require a prominent Islamic intermediary – perhaps from Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates – who would invite relatives of the two men Davis killed to the Gulf. Payment to the victims’ families could then be negotiated quietly. Once the next of kin had agreed to this settlement, the legal case against Davis for murder might be moot in a Pakistani court.

A senior Pakistani official in Washington outlined this “blood money” concept in a conversation Monday. An official of that country’s Inter-Services Intelligence directorate also endorsed this approach; he said it had the advantage of meshing with the dispute-resolution customs of the Middle East and South Asia….

Pakistan also wants a pledge by the CIA that it will not conduct “unilateral” operations within its borders, like those in which Davis was allegedly involved. The Pakistanis say they want to be treated in intelligence matters like other allies of the United States, such as Britain and France, or, closer to home, Egypt, Israel and Jordan….

The senior ISI official stressed the Pakistani desire to be regarded as partners, rather than subordinates. “We need to be treated with trust, equality and respect as the allies that we are, and not satellites,” he wrote. “We have asked that [the CIA] work with us and not behind us, and yes, we have asked that we be informed of who else is there [for the CIA] and doing what.”

Pakistan is, in reality, neither an ally nor a satellite of the United States, but a foremost base of the jihad against it.