God's Law

I am quite tired right now, and sleeping is the most desirable thing I could do right now, but I am trying to get disciplined about this whole writing thing. I forgot to mention a few other interesting things about that culture class that I took, and it had to do with the unique properties of the church state.

As a Muslim country, Qatar laws are dictated by the Sharia’a which are the rules spelled out in the Holy Koran. In the states the Supreme Court is the highest authority for settling matters of law but in Qatar the highest authority is that of the religious leader (an Iman I think) who interprets the holy law. This was particularly important to me because I had a specific question on the matter: “Are there any laws here that I would be unused to in my home country, such as the law of zero tolerance for drinking and driving?” Basically I wanted to know how to keep myself out of jail. The teacher, knowing that I am young and single, decided to explain the laws of female and male interaction. Basically it is illegal for a man and a woman to be in private together if they are not married. It is illegal for them to be provocative in public even if they are married. Lastly, although it might not be illegal, I am not to approach a Qatari woman under any circumstances with the intent to court her. He did go on to say that although it is illegal, these laws (except the last) are largely for those of the Muslim faith and that us expats generally can do what we please as long as it is in a non-offensive manner. I was glad to hear his advice, but I was still looking for more than just the rules on interacting with woman. That I could have guessed on my own, but after asking again for any reference to laws I should know but probably don’t, I realized he would not go any further. You see the laws and the rulings of the court are not published, leading to a situation where the laws and their punishments are variable.

In the states, stealing is against the law and you will be convicted if found guilty. Your guilt is independent of your motive, whether it be greed or to provide for your family. Your sentence may be lighter for one motive or another, but you are guilty either way. In the case of Sharia’a it would seem that your guilt is dependent on the infraction and the motive. Stealing for greed would be punishable whereas stealing to provide for your family could possible be deemed acceptable. Lawyers speak of ‘intent’ when it comes to laws. As in, this laws intent was to do this and that, but often the wording and precedents associated with said law make ruling based on the intent difficult. This system of variability in judgment in a Muslim nation fixes that problem. A judge can rule based on the intent of the law being ‘broken’. In the case of stealing, the intent is to define the rights of personal property, not necessarily to punish those that have no alternative that can ensure the survival of themselves and their families. This benefit in determining intent or reasonableness of a crime comes at the price of fairness. Favoritism and the differing opinions of judges can create wildly different results from similar circumstances. This does not seem to bother anyone because of their views of fate and faith. If they get a bad judge who gives an unnecessarily long sentence, it is simply the will of God.

The moderator of the event gave one interesting example. Expats are allowed to own a liquor license that grants them the right to have alcoholic beverages in their homes. Most Expats seem to have them and the state makes a pretty penny off the highly inflated beverage prices. Well one Expat bought a bunch of liquor, took it home, and then went out of town on a business trip. While he was gone, his maid decided to sell some of his liquor, and she was caught in the process. Selling alcohol is illegal, so she was arrested. Once the man got back in to town, the cops were waiting at the airport, and he was arrested as well. In court, the man tried to explain that he was given the liquor permit by the state and that his maid was the sole violator of the countries policy on alcohol. The judge did not agree with the mans logic, and offered these words. “Who is more important, the state, or God?” Clearly the answer was God, because the man was found guilty of violating the countries alcohol policy, was given lashes and sent home. No one in the court argued that he tried to sell the alcohol, but he was in violation of God’s will by even having alcohol in the first place which is in violation of Sharia’a. Despite being legal under the states law, he was guilty of God’s law and was punished accordingly.