Al-Sharḥ al-Mumtiʿ - Ibn al-'Uthaymin - (14/66)

Al-Sharḥ al-MumtiʿIbn al-'Uthaymin

If he appoints someone to carry out retaliation and then pardons, and his agent carries it out without knowing, then neither of them is liable.

If a slave is entitled to retaliation, or to the discretionary punishment for slander, then demanding it and waiving it belong to him; but if he dies, they belong to his master.

His statement, “If he appoints someone to carry out retaliation and then pardons, and his agent carries it out without knowing, then neither of them is liable,” refers to a person who becomes entitled to retaliation, whether for a life or for an injury short of death. He appoints someone to carry out retaliation on his behalf, then pardons before the agent executes it. If the agent does not know of this and carries out the retaliation, neither is liable: neither the one who pardoned—whether he is the injured party himself, or, if he has died, his heirs—nor the agent. The agent is excused, since in carrying out retaliation he relied upon a legally valid basis: the authorization of the person entitled to the right. As for the one who pardoned, he has acted rightly, and Allah, Exalted is He, says: “There is no blame upon those who do good.” [al-Tawbah: 91]

An example is a man whose hand is cut off in an assault. He is then entitled to retaliation against the one who cut off his hand, so he appoints someone to carry it out. Before the agent executes the retaliation, the injured man pardons the offender and says, “I call you to witness that I have pardoned so-and-so.” The agent, however, does not know and cuts off the offender’s hand, relying on the man’s authorization. We say: The agent bears no liability, because he cut it off on the basis of a legally valid authorization; and the one who pardoned bears no liability, because he has acted rightly. Allah, Exalted is He, says: “There is no blame upon those who do good.” [al-Tawbah: 91]

But if the agent carries out retaliation after learning of the pardon, he is a transgressor and wrongdoer. His hand is cut off if the authorization concerned cutting off a hand, and he is put to death if the retaliation concerned a life. Once the holder of the right has pardoned, the offender’s life becomes inviolable. Thus, if the agent subsequently assaults him by cutting off his hand or killing him, he has transgressed against an inviolable life, and he is held to the consequence entailed by that transgression.

This indicates that an agent’s action after his dismissal, if he is unaware of it,

وَإِنْ وَكَّلَ مَنْ يَقْتَصُّ ثُمَّ عَفَا، فَاقْتَصَّ وَكِيلُهُ وَلَمْ يَعْلَمْ فَلَا شَيْءَ عَلَيْهِمَا، وَإِنْ وَجَبَ لِرَقِيقٍ قَوَدٌ، أَوْ تَعْزِيرُ قَذْفٍ، فَطَلَبُهُ وَإِسْقَاطُهُ إِلَيْهِ، فَإِنْ مَاتَ فَلِسَيِّدِهِ. قوله: «وإن وكَّل من يقتص ثم عفا، فاقتص وكيله ولم يعلم فلا شيء عليهما» كإنسان وجب له قصاص، سواء كان في النفس أو فيما دونها، فوكَّل شخصاً ليقتص له، ثم إنه عفا قبل أن ينفّذ الوكيل، ولكن الوكيل لم يعلم ونفَّذ القصاص فلا شيء عليهما، لا على العافي ـ سواء كان المجني عليه، أو أولياءه إن كان قد مات ـ ولا على الوكيل؛ لأن الوكيل معذور، وهو في قصاصه مُستَنِدٌ إلى مُستَنَدٍ شرعي، وهو توكيل من له الحق، وأما العافي فإنه محسن، وقد قال الله تعالى: ﴿مَا عَلَى الْمُحْسِنِينَ مِنْ سَبِيلٍ﴾ [التوبة: ٩١]. مثال ذلك: رجل جُني عليه وقطعت يده، فثبت له القصاص على قاطع يده، فوكَّل من يقتص، وقبل أن ينفّذ الوكيل القصاص، عفا المجني عليه، وقال: أشهدكم أني قد عفوت عن فلان، والوكيل لم يعلم فقطع يد الجاني استناداً إلى وكالة الرجل، فنقول: لا شيء على الوكيل؛ لأنه إنما قطع مستنداً إلى مستندٍ شرعي وهو التوكيل؛ ولا شيء على العافي؛ لأنه محسن، والله تعالى يقول: ﴿مَا عَلَى الْمُحْسِنِينَ مِنْ سَبِيلٍ﴾ [التوبة: ٩١]. فإن اقتص الوكيل بعد علمه بالعفو فهو معتدٍ ظالم، وتقطع يده إذا كان التوكيل في قطع اليد، ويقتل إذا كان القصاص في النفس؛ لأنه لمَّا عفا صاحب الحق صار الجاني بعد ذلك معصوماً، فإذا جنى عليه الوكيل وقطع يده، أو قتله، فقد اعتدى على نفس معصومة، فأُلزم بما يقتضيه ذلك العدوان. وفي هذا دليل على أن تصرف الوكيل بعد العزل إذا لم يعلم