The Ruling on Blood Money and the Wisdom Behind Its Legitimacy
Blood money, known as “diyat,” is mandated in cases of unintentional and negligent killings, unless the heirs of the deceased choose to forgive. In cases of intentional homicide, blood money is applicable if the perpetrator has passed away or if the family of the victim decides to forgo retribution. Blood money responsibilities fall on anyone who causes harm to another, whether through direct action or negligence, regardless of the individual’s age, mental capacity, or intent. This applies equally to both Muslims and non-Muslims, including protected and safe individuals. The concept of blood money serves as a dual function: it inflicts a penalty on the offender while providing compensation to the victim or their family. Among its prescribed benefits are deterrence and punishment of wrongdoers, which contribute to the safeguarding of lives, along with compensation for lost lives or injuries through financial restitution received by the affected party.
Categories of Blood Money
Blood money may be categorized as either aggravated or reduced. Reduced blood money is requisite in instances of unintentional homicide, while aggravated blood money applies in cases of negligent killing. In terms of intentional killings, scholars from the Shafi’i and Hanbali schools argue that aggravated blood money applies if the victim’s heirs choose to forgive. Conversely, Abu Hanifa holds that blood money is not obligatory in such cases; rather, the parties involved should settle according to their mutual agreement, which must be immediate and not delayed. The aggravated blood money is quantified as one hundred camels, with forty of these being pregnant. It is important to note that the aggravation applies specifically to camels as dictated by religious law, making this a definitive matter that leaves no room for personal interpretation, as it falls within fixed obligations.
Categories of Individuals Responsible for Blood Money
The responsibility for paying blood money falls upon one of three entities, detailed as follows:
- The Perpetrator: Blood money is to be paid from the personal wealth of the killer in cases of intentional homicide, provided that the victim’s heirs have relinquished their right to retribution.
- The Kin of the Perpetrator: The family of the offender is liable for blood money in cases of unintentional and negligent killings.
- The Public Treasury: The public treasury is responsible for covering blood money under certain circumstances, such as:
- If a Muslim dies leaving behind debts, the ruler can pay those debts from the public treasury.
- If the relatives of the perpetrator are unable to pay blood money for unintentional or negligent homicide, the responsibility falls on the offender’s wealth; if the offender is also unable to pay, the public treasury assumes the obligation.
- In cases where the governor, acting in his official capacity, is responsible for an error that leads to a death, the treasury must cover the blood money.
- If a judge rules on an oath of mutual consent and the heirs refuse to swear against the accused, the public authority must compensate from the treasury.
- If the identity of the killer is unknown, the blood money for any slain individual whose killer cannot be determined shall be sourced from the public treasury.