Analysis of similarity in the implementation of retribution of the soul from the perspective of comparative jurisprudence



Abstract

How to punish premeditated murder is one of the issues that is done differently in different legal systems. In the Iranian legal system, retribution is the primary and main punishment in this case, but how it is implemented from the jurisprudential point of view is controversial. Most Sunni jurists believe in the possibility of observing similarity in performing retaliation, and in this regard, in addition to the narrations, they refer to the general rule of Retribution; In contrast, well-known Shiite jurists rule out the possibility of harassing the victim in retaliation despite the perpetrator committing such behavior.

How to punish premeditated murder is one of the issues that is done differently in different legal systems. In the Iranian legal system, retribution is the primary and main punishment in this case, but how it is implemented from the jurisprudential point of view is controversial. Most Sunni jurists believe in the possibility of observing similarity in performing retaliation, and in this regard, in addition to the narrations, they refer to the general rule of Retribution; In contrast, well-known Shiite jurists rule out the possibility of harassing the victim in retaliation despite the perpetrator committing such behavior.

This research descriptively and analytically examines the arguments of each of these two views and determines the autonomous promise.

Keywords: retaliation, similarity, punishment, harassment