The Federal Supreme Court overturns a sentence that sentenced “Arab” to imprisonment instead of execution

The Federal Supreme Court overturned a sentence that commuted the death sentence of a man accused of murder to five years in prison, and decided to refer the case to the Court of Appeal for further consideration, pointing out that the ruling erred in the application of Islamic law and law, and omitted a document submitted by the heirs of the victim, stating that they waived Retribution in return.

In detail, the Public Prosecution referred a defendant (Arab) to the criminal trial for murder, where the victim was beaten with an iron bar on his head until he lost consciousness, with the intention of losing his soul, demanding that he be punished.

The Court of First Instance unanimously ruled that the defendant should be punished by death by the means available in the state, in the presence of the guardians of blood or their representatives for the charge of premeditated murder. The Court of Appeal then sentenced the defendant to five years' imprisonment for the new charge of assault. Consequently, he is obliged to pay the heirs of the deceased with the deportation of the convicted person after the execution of the penalty.

The verdict was unacceptable to the Public Prosecutor. She appealed against the cassation, explaining that the verdict erred in the application of Islamic law, and also in the application of the law, as it abolished the first sentence of the execution of the accused by punishment, and sentenced him to five years imprisonment for the assault leading to death without The death of the victim was the result of a strike by an iron bar on his head in the face of aggression. The judgment also omitted the documents submitted by the representative of the Embassy of the State of the victim, including the agency. And a concession from the heirs of the victim Les paid for retribution.

The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal of the prosecution, explaining that the Maliki school focuses on premeditated murder on the willful killing and on the result that results from it. Every act committed deliberately aggression, and led to the killing is deliberate killing mandatory retribution, and it does not matter if the perpetrator in order to kill the victim Whether or not it is intended as long as it has not done so in the face of play or error, and the machine used in the killing does not matter and whether it kills or does not kill, if the perpetrator deliberately hit the victim on the face of aggression with a knife, sword, shotgun, strangulation or even a bully Or punch or rod, and this led to the murder of the victim, it would have committed murder, and be The punishment for this is retribution, except by pardoning the guardian of blood on or without blood money.

The court pointed out that the evidence of the lawsuit, including the statements of witnesses and the statement of the accused and confirmed by the forensic report, that the death of the victim as a result of being beaten by the defendant with an iron bar on his head in the face of aggression, and therefore the pillars of the crime of willful murder due to retribution Applicable to the incident at issue.

It concluded that the contested verdict would be tainted by the mistake in applying the provisions of Islamic law glue and law, as well as the lack of causation and corruption in the reasoning that must be overturned, provided that it is with the veto referral.

- The prosecution stabbed on

Appeal judgment

Veto.