Crucifixion in Saudi Arabia: Fact vs Fiction

There has been a lot of confusion and misinformation regarding the practice of crucifixion in Saudi Arabia. Namely, the claim often heard that Saudi Arabia uses crucifixion as a form of execution for particularly heinous crimes. This article aims to clarify the reality of this practice by examining its legal status and frequency of use in the country. Crucifixion is both a legal and cultural reference point in Saudi Arabia, but it is rarely applied, if at all.

Legal Framework and Historical Context

Crucifixion is not a common or frequent form of execution in Saudi Arabia. According to legal scholars and experts, it is mentioned in the Quran as a punishment for 'highway robbers who leave dead behind.' However, according to the Oxford Handbook of Criminal Law, punishments mentioned in the Quran cannot be abolished, but their application is very rare.

Sheikh Nisar Ahmed, a prominent figure from Dubai, UAE, has stated that crucifixion is not used and has never been used in Saudi Arabia since its establishment in 1932. This assertion is backed by the fact that Saudi Arabia has not implemented crucifixion as a legal punishment in modern times.

Alternative Execution Methods in Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, the most common methods of execution are beheading and firing squad. These methods are generally considered to be more humane than other forms of capital punishment. Beheading is carried out swiftly and is often delegated to a professional executioner to ensure its efficacy. The use of the guillotine in France until the late 1970s serves as a historical precedent that such practices are not entirely foreign to societies.

Beheading is seen as a humane method when compared to other forms of execution, such as the gas chamber, electric chair, and lethal injection. The gas chamber and electric chair have been known to fail in carrying out their intended functions, leading to prolonged and painful experiences for the convicted. The electric chair, in particular, has a notorious reputation for electrical malfunctions that could result in prolonged suffering or even death by burning. Similarly, lethal injection has faced criticism for its inadequacy in doses and the potential for severe pain if given incorrectly.

Humane vs. Inhumane: Evaluating Execution Methods

The argument often made is that capital punishment, no matter the method, is inhumane. However, it is important to distinguish between different methods. Beheading is viewed as the most humane method due to its swift and (relatively) painless nature. In contrast, methods such as lethal injection, gas chamber, and electric chair can lead to prolonged suffering if they fail or are administered incorrectly.

It is also important to consider the context in which these methods are used. In countries like the United States, where serial killers, drug cartels, and other violent criminals pose a significant threat to society, the need for a swift and effective form of capital punishment can be argued. The use of beheading in Saudi Arabia is a reflection of a legal code that aims to quickly and efficiently execute those convicted of heinous crimes, thereby deterring future criminal behavior.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while crucifixion is mentioned in the legal framework of Saudi Arabia as a form of punishment, it is rarely, if ever, applied. The primary methods of execution in the country are beheading and firing squad, which are both seen as more humane in comparison to the gas chamber, electric chair, and lethal injection. The unique cultural and legal context of Saudi Arabia allows for the swift and somewhat painless execution of criminals, serving as a deterrent and maintaining social order.