The Scales of Justice: Contrasting Theories of Punishment in Islam and the West

Abstract

This article presents a comparative analysis of punishment theories in Islamic law and Western jurisprudence. It examines the philosophical underpinnings and objectives of the Islamic system, detailing its specific categories of Hudud, Qisas, Diyya, and Ta'zir, which aim to achieve social order, moral reform, and spiritual salvation. The study simultaneously traces the evolution of Western punishment, from retributive roots to modern theories emphasizing deterrence, rehabilitation, and social protection. The comparison reveals significant parallels and divergences, while also identifying distinct contemporary challenges: human rights concerns and the need for contextual interpretation in applying Islamic law, and issues of mass incarceration and racial disparities within Western systems. The analysis also considers the potential of restorative justice as a convergent alternative. The article concludes that the implementation of both punitive traditions in modern contexts requires ongoing critical evaluation to balance justice, social order, and individual rights.