Section

Retaliation may not be carried out except in the presence of the ruler or his deputy, and with a sharp instrument. Retaliation for a life may be carried out only by striking the neck with a sword, even if the offender killed him by some other means.

His statement, “Retaliation may not be carried out,” means: upon the offender.

His statement, “except in the presence of the ruler”: the ruler is the highest head of the state.

His statement, “or his deputy,” means one who ordinarily acts on his behalf in such matters. In our time, the one acting on his behalf is the amir: the amir is deputy to the regional governor; the regional governor is deputy to the minister of interior; and the minister of interior is deputy to the highest head of the state.

Thus, the immediate deputy must be present. If retaliation is carried out without his presence, the retaliation is valid, but the one who carried it out is subject to discretionary punishment for acting in defiance of the imam’s authority. Retaliation was restricted to the presence of the ruler or his deputy out of fear of transgression, for the heirs of the slain are filled with rage against the killer. If he is presented for execution without the presence of the ruler or his deputy, they may exceed the bounds by mutilating him, executing him cruelly, or otherwise. This is not permissible.

His statement, “Retaliation may not be carried out,” also indicates that the one who carries out retaliation is not the imam or his deputy; rather, it is carried out by those entitled to it—namely, the heirs of the slain—on condition that they carry it out properly. If they are unable to do so properly, they must leave it either to the imam or appoint someone who can properly carry out the retaliation.

The term “retaliation” is general and includes retaliation for a life and for lesser injuries. Thus, it includes retaliation involving a hand, a foot, a tongue, and the like. It may not be carried out except in the presence of the imam or his deputy.