vol_4_4_chapter_4_part_III

CILS HARMONISED SHARIA PENAL CODE ANNOTATED
One difference between the PC and CILS is the difference between “and” and “or”: this
is clearly noted. But this still leaves the footnote ambiguous as to whether the indicated
numbers are maximums, minimums, or to be imposed exactly as stated, and also as to
whether the punishments specified by the States are conjunctive or disjunctive. To
resolve these ambiguities the reader should read the variants back into the language of
the section being annotated. Thus all the numbers in this case are maximums, and the
stroke means “and shall also be liable to”. Where this does not work we have made fuller
notes. There remain some ambiguities in the language of the codes which we have of
course not attempted to resolve.
4. Omission of section titles in the body of the code. The titles of the code sections are
given at the beginning under the heading “Arrangement of Sections”. In order to save
space we have not repeated the titles in the body of the code; anyone wanting to know
the title of a particular section can refer to the list at the beginning.
5. Note on spellings, formatting, etc. As throughout this work, we have corrected and
standardised spellings, capitalisations, etc. in the Harmonised Sharia Penal Code, and
made adjustments to the formatting. This is discussed further in the Preface to Volumes
I - V.
6. The CILS Harmonised Sharia Penal Code Annotated follows.
35