LAW OF DURESS IN ISLAMIC LAW AND COMMON LAW: A ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

348 lslamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 128. See. mm 539 above and, acamp+q W. Som liLe the m in L.hvene. -tic Produebioo v. Fcrcnh, 305. Mieh. 193.9. N.W. 2d. 57.65 (1943) ooatimred to ate that "[t* qaatim a to what constitutes domr is a matter of law, but wktkr dums edrts in a particular cau is a quation of fact". Tbir, of anute, raembh the Llamic appro& in m y rrspear. Nevertheless, at Comntam law his appwh is lugely limited 129. to~oft~)nomicd~inrhichtbc~~intothenooBfulntsrofthedurrsstaL apdal pr6mhma. P.S.Atiyeh."EcwomicI)mtsrandtheOverbomcnill."98L.Q.~~.'197.201(April. 1982); rimikr mitiquw have been made by lbfbty. "Ekmenm of Wrongful Raaue." p. 440; Pertins and Boys. Chid Low, p. 1054; Smith and Hop, Criminal Law, p. 209, cal.rmui and Penillo. Luw of Confmcp. P. 338, Dcnnio. "Duress. Murder." P. 222; LaFave and Scott. .. . Handbook, p. 382; Fitte. vicrunrroho n, pp. 73.74.7881; Fridman. Gmadian Md English Law, pp. 69-70., L. Vandervoit. "Social Justice m the Modern Regulatory State: Durea. Necc~sity. and the Chsemunl Model in Law." wl. 6. No. 2 L. & Mill, 205, %211 (1987); Hale. "Bargahrio1p." pp. 606 and 618; Dawson, Econ. Dunn," p. 267; Orchard. "Dcfemr of Compulsion." pp. 105106. 130. David Hume ona argued, can we seriously claim that a poor pxsmt who knows m foreign language, and lives day to day by small waga is free to lave his country? D. Hume. "Of the Origi~I aontrrt." m 2 &says and TraatLe. 268,281-282 (London: 1710). In fact, the ~thfraetol~butheirunaMeto&~o.hArLtotle~thntlo~w choice dtuatiom are only involuntary m the abtract. Aristotle. Eahico N i c d , 1110a. (W.D. Ross trans. 1925). ci&d in Flacber. "Individualization." p. 1277. See. Fittc, Vidimizaton, pp. 78-79 diacussion of free choice and duress. and P. 104 N. 157 citing cases that strecs the difference betweea legal duress and d v e life situations. 131. Atiyah. sypm mte 125 p. 2112. 132. Brady v. United States, 390 U.S. 570 (1%8); ace. Note, '%e Udtutiondity of Plea Bnrgrining." 83 Haw. L. Rev. 1387. 13%-1403 (1910); pointing to the iaeOairtency in tbc Supreme Court's wlition adysis. The Supreme Court held that a kar of king 6rcd is mcrcivc cnougb to reodes ones self incriminating testimony in vduntary. Gmity v. New Jersey, 385 U.S. 493. 497-498 (1%7). In SpeneL v. Klein. 385 U.S. 511-515 (1%7), the Supreme Caurt held that a feu of dihnnmt rndtrs d-' ' ' ltiag testimony mvoluntary. This secmr inanrfrtent with maiataiaing tb.t fur of the death ptnalty is noncocrcive d u e one is conaidering other than the dcfcodant's psychology. 133. State v. Grccn. 470 S.W. Y. 565 (Mo. 1971). M. Denicd. 405 U.S. 1U73 (197L). lhc trt is objadve; thsrr mut lm an .caul belief and a mammabk belief, Pbopk v. Coadkv, 69 Cal. App. 3d. 1008. 101@1011. 138 Cal. Rptr. 515. 521-522, Cert. Denied. 434 U.S. 988 (1977). Courts frequently ltresr policy masons for denying a claim or necessity, and the importame of maintaining prison order. People v. Richards. 269 CI1. App. 2d768,778,75 Cal. Rplr. 597,6041 (I-); State v. Pahner. 45 Del. 308.310. RA. 2d 442.444 (0. Gea. ~er., 1950); ~sople V. NOW 18 m. ~pp. MD, im N.W. Y. 916,918 (I-). see, dirurion and cases cited m Fletcbcr. "IadividualiPtion." pp. 124S1286. Conrcquently. Chrla E.ilor solution that -tes the prisoner's predicament and sodety's interest in not having prbmm escape. People v. Lover Camp, 43 Cal. App. 3d. 823,831-32.118 Cal. Rpa. 110. 115 (1947); United Statcs v. Boomer. 571 F. 2d. 543, 545 (Cir.), Cert. DM, 436, U.S. 1911 (1976); United Statu v. Bailey, 444 US. 394,41243 (1980) and United SUtg v. Mer, 598. S.W. Y. 540 (Mo. App. 1930) (w a mon hdividurlizad rpporrb).Thm~~t~theCourtsmarhetherprimoucapeaorspdca of the ddena of aeadty or durcs. United Srates v. MicheIron. 559 F. 2d 567 (9th Cir. 19n), (dunar); Pmple v. Luther, 394 Mich. 619,232, N.W. 2d. 184 (1975). (durcs); State v. Baker, ibid. (nearrity); People v. Lover Camp, idem. (nemrity); Pwpk v. Uoger. 66. III. 2d. 333 5 III Du. 848.362 N.E. 2d. 319 (1977), (nummity); People V. Ricbudr, idem. (noceaity). See gcnwdly. Note, "Prism Esgpe and Dchces bad on Ckditbm: A cboory of Social Prehmcc." 67 Caf. L. RN. 1183 (1979); Note "Intokmble,*' Coaditim m a Defence to Risoa Escape," 26 U.C.L.A. 11% (1979) and Note, "Duress and the Rioon @acapc: A New me for an old Dcfena," 45 S. Cd. L. Rev. 1062 (1972).
Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 349 For example, conarning tbe Wbility of involuntary coofedom, the Supreme Court baa~aniadividualizcdrpproeehbsredonthetotrlityd~.(3ulombev. Canoectieut, 367 US., 3%. 602 (1961); Fikes v. Alabama, 352 U.S. 191,197 (1957), Paync v. Artuua. 356. U.S. 560. 567 (1958); Haley v. Ohio. 332. U.S. 596. 599 (1948). Sec, Mdloy v. Hogan, 378 U.S. 1.7. (1964); Haynts v. W-, 373 U.S. 503 (1963) Minay v. Arinnu, 437 U.S. 385 (1978). In Cukms6e. while atstiq that dmtahcu h the utiinatc test of the ntidity of umfcdsions, the Supreme Court recognLsd that this h not &ly a quation of pychololly but nrlee of law applied to psychological facts. In Stein v. New York. 346 U.S 156.182-186 (1952) m'd on other grounds. Jsctson v. Denno. 378 U.S. 368 (1964). the Cwrt uaerted that sina physical violence serves no lawful pqm& it is inhenntly d. Intamgation docs serve a axial value and, tbmfore, it i not inbcrently coercive. Sec.Pletcber. "Individualiution",pp. 1m-1mand Fiagamte. VicZindElllion, pp. SlW. ThcImpedofdmoresisevidentinthe~ofanradmarri.ges.Se~notiom concerning women's honour played a larger rde than they at present do. Sac. Memdith v. Meredith. 79 Mo. App. 636 (1899). (Threatending to kill the man who dishonoured a daugbtm is not dureaa); Shepberd v. Shepherd. 192 S.W. 658. 661-63 (1917). (threats that raulthaman~the~he~tedandpomiaedto~inotdurrrv bealeethmisastrongprerrumptiOnthattbemarrisgewasentmdhtoinMmntof moral obligations); Sec also, L.N. Bmwn. 'The Shotgun marriage," 42 Tul. L. Rev. 837 (1968). D. Bradky. "Duress and Arranged Marriages," 46. Modem L. Rev. 499 (1983); Wertheimer, C h , pp. 71-n. A eue miming from outside the field of dues dmomtrata, that even juries can believe that there i h a p a choice. In Maddl v. Rraoe. 511 S.W. 2d 225 (Ts. 1974). Marshall was held priooner in his how by his neighbow's vidous boar. The boar had charged Marahdl ten or twelve timcs. MarsbaU had pmioudy disarssed the Hog's viaoumea with defendant. Eventually, the boar managed to in@ Marshall as be attempted to kave hio home. The jury found that MarsbaU was conbibutody negligent for fading to build a face around hio ~,andbe*~therisLofinjurywhen,despiteofhiob~ofthe v i h propearities of boar. Madd faikd to aboot the boar. Thc Court of Appcd affhncd. Thc Supreme Court of Texan held that contributory ne-a is not a dsfoaa in stria lirbility cases. Importantly, the Court held that Marshall did not anumc the risk because he did not have a free and voluntary choice. The plaintiff's choice3 of riaking injury arc remaining a Ppironer at home mere not as a mattcr of law the vduntary choices to which the law mtiW him. Additionally. the daughter ofthe aoimal was not areaonable al-tive sina be d d have faad pnxca,tion for ouch an act. Idcm, at 2#%1. Evidently, tbe Covrtwasforcedbythe jurie8uns~emlyvadicttoa~prrtcnrionrofaviYmenx,me. 'h Cow? had to rely on legal standards, and on the I@ jargon of "as a mattcr of law" which in reality betray idea of appmpriate social bebaviow. and balancing of rights and entiUemmts. ilia arc is d*arsred h Wcrtheimer, Cocrdan p. 61. Kaph v. K.plan. la. N.E. 2d. M6.710 (1962). (the threat of personal embamsmmt wuwt~asnttorendcrpl.intitibmnofqdtyofd~ti.lformaLingacon~); ace. Wertheimer. Corrdon, p. 12. Inordertopmvedterytheaccuoerha~topmvidefourwi~whobdtheseNd ret including penetration without apying. Sec, on Qcrdhf (the crime of ururing mucone of sdultery or fornication). Ibn Rushd. Biddym d-MyW, (Cairo Mumtapha Halabi. 1981), VOI. n, pp. 44043. 'he MPC, docs not ~~4)gniSe threats to reputation in criminal carcs. Sac note W above and acannpanying W. WV. Lewis, 4 S.E. 2d. 464,468 (Cia. 1939). lbis case is d i d in Wertheimcr, Coercion, P. 38. Ibe Court in m, hoveva, atated that, 'lbc thnat. . . must be suf6cicnt to ovmanc the mind and will of a penon of onbary hem." Id.. p. 467. 'hk might uplrin the court's duision. Oae ferL the Court WM motivated by mutated policy (or otherwbe) conaidemtiom cspeeidly in Light of the fad that the purportbdly ~d that a -tiff
Page 1 and 2: Islamic Studies (Islamabad) 30:3 (1
Page 3 and 4: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 307 ov
Page 5 and 6: Islamic Studies. 30:3 (1991) 309 At
Page 7 and 8: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 31 1 t
Page 9 and 10: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 313 Th
Page 11 and 12: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 315 ac
Page 13 and 14: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 317 If
Page 15 and 16: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 319 th
Page 17 and 18: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 321 CR
Page 19 and 20: lskmic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 323 of
Page 21 and 22: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 325 th
Page 23 and 24: lslamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 327 ki
Page 25 and 26: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 329 A
Page 27 and 28: lslamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 33 1 I
Page 29 and 30: Ishmic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 333 und
Page 31 and 32: law of duress is in need of develop
Page 33 and 34: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 337 sa
Page 35 and 36: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 339 Se
Page 37 and 38: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 341 mL
Page 39 and 40: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 343 Op
Page 41 and 42: klamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 345 One
Page 43: Islamic Studies, 30:3 (1991) 347 11

LAW OF DURESS IN ISLAMIC LAW AND COMMON LAW: A ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?