Death Penalty for Corruptors: Perspectives of Classical and Contemporary Ulama

This inquiry began with the author’s curiosity about Islam’s treatment of the death penalty for corruptors and perpetrators of heinous crimes. The author initially viewed the death penalty as pre-empting Allah’s decree (takdir), given the possibility that a person might change and improve their morals. However, research revealed that the views of Sufi scholars align with those of sharia jurisprudence.

Carrying out a lawful death sentence does not pre-empt divine destiny. This can be understood in two ways: First, Allah’s decree encompasses cause and effect, including sharia causes. If a person is legally executed, that death is already written in His decree. No one can hasten or delay death beyond what is determined (QS. Al-A’raf: 34). Scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah and prominent Sufis assert that implementing Allah’s law is the realisation of destiny, not a violation of it. Punishing with justice upholds His rules, not oversteps His decree. The Sufi principle holds that ‘Sharia is the boundary, Haqiqa is the content’; thus, sharia justice is the foundation for inner reform and repentance.

Second, the hope of repentance and good deeds does not nullify legal obligations. Repentance does not eliminate human rights. A corruptor or serious criminal must return stolen assets, restore losses, and face state sanctions. Repentance to Allah erases sins against Him, but it does not erase the rights of victims or the duty to maintain public order. Furthermore, there is a time limit for repentance. It is only accepted before death arrives or before the major signs of the Hour appear (QS. An-Nisa: 18). Since no one knows when a person will die, delaying punishment based on the uncertain assumption that they ‘might change’ is speculative.

Many Sufi scholars warn that avoiding punishment in the hope of repentance can be a form of weakness that trivialises the rights of the masses. Justice for thousands of suffering people takes precedence over the potential change of one individual.

Regarding when the death penalty is permissible, scholars of Sufism who adhere to the objectives of Sharia (Maqasid al-Sharia) agree on specific conditions. It is allowed only for extraordinary crimes that destroy the fabric of society, such as large-scale corruption causing mass poverty, famine, or death, or for repeat offenders who show no deterrence. It must be a last resort (ultimum remedium) after all other efforts have failed, conducted through a fair and meticulous judicial process. Furthermore, it must not be driven by vengeance, but by the intention to cleanse society, protect lives and property, and serve as a deterrent to others.