Death Penalty: A Response to Arguments by Indonesian Muslim Opposers

Muchammad Ichsan


Introduction to The Problem: Life is the greatest gift human beings receive. Man can achieve any task with life, and without it, man can do nothing. Thus, attempts by the State to punish human beings with the death penalty for wrongdoing are reaping the pros and cons. It is clear the stance of Western human rights activists opposed to the death penalty. What is interesting is that, although Islamic law supports it, many educated Muslims have objected to the death penalty.

Purpose/Objective Study: The purpose of this research is to analyze and respond to the arguments used by Indonesian Muslim human rights activists, especially those integrated into human rights organizations, which are anti-death penalty. It is hoped that these reviews and responses will contain more definite opinions that can provide enlightenment for all.

Design/Methodology/Approach: This research used a descriptive, analytical approach. Therefore, it employed secondary data and normative methods combined to case and statute approach in studying, analyzing, and responding to the arguments of anti-death penalty human rights activists among Indonesian Muslims. Their cases are to be brought forward, investigated, and then returned one by one.

Findings: The research found that the human rights ideology propagated by western human rights activists is influencing Indonesian Muslim activists. They have the same point that the death penalty degrades humanity and violates human rights. In the meantime, Islamic law defends the death penalty for providing justice to the victims and the wider community, and for preserving life.


Death Penalty; Human Rights; Islamic Law; Right to Life

Full Text:



Al-Baihaqi, A. B. A. bin al-H. bin A. (1344). Al-Sunan al-kubrÄ (First). Haedarabad: Majlis DÄirÄt al-Ma’Ärif al-Niá¹­Ämiyah.

Al-Bukhari, M. bin I. (1987). Al-JÄmi’ al-á¹£aḥīḥ (1st ed.). Cairo: DÄr Al-Sya’b.

Al-Hajjaj, A. al-H. M. bin. (n.d.). á¹¢aḥīḥ muslim. Beirut: DÄr al-Jail.

Al-Razi, M. ibn U. ibn al-H. (1400). Al-Maḥṣūl fÄ« ‘ilm al-uṣūl (First). Riyadh: JÄmi’Ät al-ImÄm Muḥammad ibn Sa’ūd al-IslÄmiyah.

Amitai, E. (2010). Life: The most basic right. Journal of Human Rights, 9(1), 100-110.

Amnesty International. (2019). Death penalty. Retrieved December 25, 2019, from

Anti-Death Penalty Asia Network. (2019). About Us. Retrieved December 27, 2019, from

Arifin, T. (2019). The guarantee of the application of capital punishment on a peacfull and harmonious life: Proof from around the world. PETITA: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Syariah, 4(1), 56–66.

Arifin, T. (2015). Misunderstanding of the Indonesian human rights activists on the application of the death penalty. Asy-Syari'ah, 17(2), 185-198.

Audah, A. Q. (2011). Al-Tasyrī’ Al-JinÄ`Ä« Al-IslÄmÄ« MuqÄranan bi Al-QÄnÅ«n Al-Waá¸â€™Ä«. Beirut: DÄr Al-Kutub Al-‘Ilmiyah.

Badan Pekerja Kontras. (2007). Praktek hukuman mati di Indonesia. Jakarta.

Baker, M. (2018). Capital punishment for apostasy in Islam. Arab Law Quarterly, 32(4), 439–461.

Bibi, S., Hongdao, Q., Ullah, N., Khaskheli, M. B., Saleem, H. A. R. (2019). Excessive use of death penalty as stoppage tool for terrorism: Wrongful death executions in Pakistan. Journal of Law, Policy, and Globalization, 81, 42-52.

Burleson, E. (2005). Juvenile execution, terrorist extradition, and supreme court discretion to consider death penalty jurisprudence. Albany Law Review, 68, 909-950. Retrieved from

Dhillon, G., Mohammad, N., Miin, N. Y. (2012). Capital punishment in Malaysia and globally: A tool for justice or a weapon against humanity. Legal Network Series, 1-24. Retrieved from

Dubagari, U. A. (2016). Same sex marriage, human rights and death penalty:

Common and Islamic law perspectives. Journal of Philosophy,

Culture and Religion, 23, 49–57. Retrieved from

ECPM. (2016). Report 6th world congress against the death penalty. Retrieved from

Fayaz, A. A., Nezhad, A. K. A., Moghaddam, H. N. (2016). A critique of documentations of discretionary death penalty in jurisprudence and Afghanistan Penal Code. The Social Sciences, 11(4), 463-469. Retrieved from

Feldman, J. C. (2015). Nothing less than the dignity of man: The eighth amendment and state efforts to reinstitute traditional methods of execution.

Washington Law Review, 90(3), 1313-1348. Retrieved from

Hnidka, R. (2016). European perspective and legal framework of death penalty. Izzivi Prihodnosti/Challenges of the Future, 1(4), 159–171. Retrieved from

Imparsial. (2016). Imparsial minta hukuman mati dihentikan. Retrieved December 26, 2019, from

Imparsial. (2019a). Evaluasi praktik hukuman mati pada era pemerintahan Jokowi 2014-2019. Retrieved December 27, 2019, from

Imparsial. (2019b). Profil. Retrieved December 26, 2019, from

Johnson, D. T. (2016). Retention and reform in Japanese capital punishment. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 49(4), 853-889. Retrieved from

Kallins, L. B. (1993). The juvenile death penalty: Is the United States in controvertion of international law? Maryland Journal of International Law & Trade, 17(1), 77-108. Retrieved from

Karim, R., Newaz, S., & Kabir, A. I. (2017). A Comparative analysis of retributive justice and the law of qisas. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 2(2), 169.

KontraS. (2005). Hukuman Mati adalah Pelanggaran Prinsip Kemanusiaan dan Konstitusi RI! Retrieved December 27, 2019, from

KontraS. (2019). Profil KontraS. Retrieved December 27, 2019,

LBH Masyarakat. (2015). Negara harus segera melakukan moratorium hukuman mati. Retrieved December 28, 2019, from

LBH Masyarakat. (2019a). Hukuman mati bukan solusi: Pernyataan sikap LBH Masyarakat atas eksekusi Amrozi, dkk. Retrieved December 28, 2019, from

LBH Masyarakat. (2019b). Tentang kami. Retrieved December 28, 2019, from

Lindsey, T., & Steiner, K. (2016). Islam, the monarchy and criminal law in Brunei: The syariah penal code order, 2013. Griffith Law Review, 25(4), 552–580.

McRae, D. (2017). Indonesian capital punishment in comparative perspective. Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences of Southeast Asia, 173(1), 1–22.

Mohamed, G. (2017). Reforming the death penalty in Egypt: An Islamic law perpetive. Unpublished Master's Thesis. Indiana University Maurer School of Law, Indiana.

Novak, A. (2015). The abolition of the mandatory death penalty in India and Bangladesh: A comparative commonwealth perspective. Global Business & Development Law Journal, 28, 227-254. Retrieved from

Olugbenga, A. E. (2012). Modern methods of executing condemned prisoners:

Elixir to painful killings? International Journal of Business

and Social Science, 3(8), 141-148. Retrieved from

Ramzan, S., Akhter, N., & Rubab, A. (2015). Punishment from Islamic perspective. Journal of Social Sciences, 9(1), 53-56. Retrieved from

Rao, D. (2015). An autopsy evaluation of complete decapitation injuries. International Journal of Forencis Science & Pathology, 3(4), 99-104.

Rifai, E. (2017). An analysis of the death penalty in Indonesia criminal law.

Sriwijaya Law Review, 1(2), 190-199.

Shaheed, A., & Sanei, F. (2016). Outlier: Iran and its use of death penalty. Cardozo Legal Studies Research Paper, 564. Retrieved from

Simandjuntak, D. (2015). Spectacle of the scaffold ? The politics of death penalty in Indonesia. ISEAS Yusof Ishak Institute, (46), 1–8. Retrieved from

Sina, L. (2016). Implementation of the death penalty in the perspective of human rights in Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review, 2(3), 385.

Sulaiman, A. (2018). Reinterpretasi ayat al- qiá¹£Äá¹£ QS. Al-Baqarah: 178-179 (Pendekatan maqÄá¹£id al-syarÄ«'ah dan sosio-historis). Maghza: Jurnal Ilmu Al-Qur'an dan Tafsir, 3(2), 242-252.

The Lancet. (2016). Ending the death penalty for juveniles. The Lancet, 387(10018), 506.

The World Coalition Against the Death Penalty. (2019). Presentation. Retrieved December 26, 2019, from

United Nations. (2016). Death penalty and Punishment (1st ed.; I. Šimonović, Ed.). New York: Office of High Commissioner.

Xiong, M., Miao, M. (2018). Miscarriage of Justice in Chinese Capital Cases. Hastings International & Comparative Law Review, 41(3), 273-342. Retrieved from



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2020 Jurnal Hukum Novelty

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Hukum Novelty

ISSN 1412-6834 (Print)

ISSN 2550-0090 (Online)

This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Hukum Novelty Stats



Jurnal Hukum Novelty has been covered by the following indexing sites:




Jurnal Hukum Novelty is member of: