Abusive Use of the Right to Repel the Attacker against Oneself in Islamic Jurisprudence Compared to Criminal Jurisprudence

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to verify the applicability of the theory of abuse in the use of the right to the right of self-defense in Islamic law, and to clarify the legal opinion about it.

Methods: This study was based on the use of the descriptive approach; To prove the legitimacy of the right to defend oneself in Islamic Sharia and legal jurisprudence, the limits of this right, and the comparative approach; To compare between Sharia and legal jurisprudence in the perception of the occurrence of abuse in the use of this right, and the deductive method; To extract cases of abuse in the use of this right by applying the standards of jurisprudential theory to the use of this right

Results: The study found that the abuse of the right of self-defense was proven in one of the theory criteria, which is the subjective criterion, without the objective criterion. The abuse of this right is proven when the intention of revenge appears, not the intent to defend. Additionally, the irregularities in the payment of the attacker in the objective aspect related to the acts of payment are all due to proving the occurrence of infringement and abuse by the defender, and this infringement is a departure from the boundaries of the right and not an arbitrary use of the right.

Conclusions: Expanding the studies related to the theory of abuse of the right in all other rights, not only civil rights