International Journal on Criminology Volume 4, Number 2, Winter 2016 | Page 56

International Journal on Criminology
Booby-traps are also one of their weapons of choice. When hiding explosives,
terrorists have used the bodies of people and animals, mailboxes, and tracts (digging
out the wall behind the tract), as well as jackets “forgotten” in movie theaters and even
bird cages. Terrorist groups also engage in kidnapping, either for ransom or for rape
or execution after torture and mutilation. Traitors to the cause because they voted or
refused assistance; apostates, accomplices of the tyrant: the victims all fall under the
effect of the criminal verdict known as fatwa, with the main objective being to spread
terror.
Normative Tools of the Terrorists: Fatwa, Idjtihad, Jihad
Terrorist methods are usually studied from the perspective of materials. This
approach is certainly important in preventing this scourge, but the psychological
dimension of the phenomenon should be just as important as its material aspects. Not
always easy, this potential approach would renew the study of new criminal threats.
The idea here is to analyze the genesis of the fatwas for criminal purposes, their
psychological path, and the way they conceive of the passage into action, following this
“process of legitimization of action” observed by the pioneers of modern criminology.
What is a fatwa? At the beginning, it was a legal act, a consultation motivated
by the absence of a Quranic verse or an explicit statement by the Prophet related to
the behavior of Muslims with other Muslims, with non-Muslims, or with God. The
fatwa is developed by intellectual effort (idjtihad) starting from something said by the
Prophet or an obscure verse for the layman or by analogy with the sayings and acts of
the Prophet and his companions.
It is pronounced by a doctor of the faith, a legal expert recognized as such,
whose morality and knowledge qualify for this exercise, which is important in the life
of Muslims. Without this competency, the jurisconsult is condemned to heresy and
blasphemy. Elder of the judges of Cordoba, the premonitory philosopher Ibn Roshd
(Averroes) deemed that the misfortune of Muslims, the hostility between them, their
hatred and intestine struggles, came from incompetents venturing into the domain of
religious interpretation. Their speculations pushed Muslims to divide into sects, and
then to kill each other. 52
The intellectual mechanisms, psychological support, and indirect paths that
they take make indirect fatwas a danger to society: their deformations awaken primal
instincts and encourage emotional surges. Many legal experts have thus found in
jurisprudence the opportunity to leave behind their scruples and accumulated earthly
goods. 53 These fatwas knowingly turned to subjective ends have a major influence on
the minds of laypeople. Even worse, their effect is contagious. “It is through a fatwa
52
Ibn Roshd, “On the Harmony Between Religion and Philosophy.”
53
Ibid.
55