Читать книгу What 'Isa ibn Hisham Told Us - Muhammad al-Muwaylihi - Страница 21

Miṣbāḥ al-sharq 35, December 15, 1898

4.1

ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: When the day of the court session arrived, I went to the court with my friend. In the courtyard outside I found people who looked pale; their expressions were grim. They breathed heavily and lifted their hands towards the heavens in despair. We watched in amazement as falsehood was passed off as truth and truths were denied. In all the commotion, we noticed some people complaining and making menacing remarks, a criminal currying favor, and a witness hesitating. A policeman kept uttering threats. Elsewhere, an orderly was taking matters into his own hands, and a lawyer was making his preparations. A mother was wailing, a baby crying, a girl fretting, and an old man grumbling. I heard people making incompatible and contradictory statements, and saw the lawyers who were about to defend the two parties sharpening their tongues and rousing their spirits, as they prepared to enter the arena of verbal combat and conduct the defense in cases of dispute, so that both of them could take away as their spoils from the legal battlefield an acquittal and the removal of suspicion and guilt.

With my friend I withdrew to a corner. At my side, the lawyer kept talking about the requisite principles, subsidiary issues, various other points and circumstances, and also mentioning the various phrases, articles, and sections dealing with misdemeanors and infractions. Then he thumbed through his notes, turned his files over, and gave us a solemn promise that the Pāshā need have no worries about being acquitted of the charge. Meanwhile, I was answering all my companion’s questions as the situation demanded. When he asked me questions about this particular slaughterhouse, I informed him that it was actually the court itself.

4.2

PĀSHĀ The memories I have of the Shariah Court and the judge’s residence are certainly different from what I see now. Has Time included it among the things on which it has wrought such a major transformation and upheaval?

ʿĪSĀ This is the Native Court, not the Shariah Court.

PĀSHĀ Is there some other form of jurisdiction besides the Shariah Court?

ʿĪSĀ In this country you can take your pick! The judiciary operates through numerous courts and a variety of committees. These include Shariah Courts, Native Courts, Mixed Courts, Disciplinary Tribunals, and Consular Courts, not to mention the Special Courts.

PĀSHĀ What is this utter confusion? Have Egyptians divided into different sects and parties, tribes, and family groups? Have they turned into people of different species who live in discordant groups and divided classes, so that they’ve had to establish a special court for each one? This isn’t how I remember them in days of old, even though dynasties may have changed. Is the noble Shariah extinct? Have the centers of judicial authority been eradicated?Oh God, forgive me and curse the devil!

ʿĪSĀ Things are not the way you think or surmise. Egyptians are not split into groups; they are a single people and a single government. It is the organization of things that demands this kind of arrangement. I’ll explain it to you as I always do:

4.3

The role of the Shariah Court is now restricted to matters of personal status: marriage, divorce, and things like that.

PĀSHĀ By God, things really have decayed; all semblance of organization has vanished! How can people live in stable surroundings without God’s holy law? Are we really living in an age which the poet meant when he said:

In their time the holy law was abrogated.

If only they had been abrogated like their holy law!³⁴

ʿĪSĀ The noble Shariah has not been abrogated; on the contrary, it lasts for ever, as long as there is any justice in the world and honesty exists among peoples. But it is a treasure ignored by its own folk, a jewel neglected by its own merchants,

Or a precious pearl, no sooner did a diver see it

than he rejoiced and sank in prayer.³⁵

4.4

Nowadays people pay no attention to the various aspects of its structure and formulation. Instead they prefer to adhere to the branches at the expense of the roots and to dispense with the kernel for the husks. They argue about regulations, concentrate assiduously on insignificant matters, and devote themselves to paltry and worthless matters. Their greatest aspiration and goal is to obscure the clear truth and complicate our liberal faith. They’ve never grasped what the laws of time demand. Every era has an order of its own which requires that the provisions of the Shariah be adjusted. Instead they are preoccupied with insignificant issues, in the apparent belief that that’s the way of the world; Destiny and Time follow their course for a while and then come to a stop. As a result, they’re a primary reason for the charge that’s leveled against the noble Shariah—may it be purified and sanctified!—namely that its legal authority is deficient, its obligations are weakened, and it lacks fairness. They are all entirely happy with this appalling situation. Instead of upholding the law, they fool around with it. The kind of thing that they bother about now is: “During the ritual ablutions, is it legitimate to wipe your shoes if they are made of glass”—weird things like that. Everything has ground to a halt, whence the need to create the Native Court alongside the Shariah Court.

4.5

PĀSHĀ Shariah scholars must have an obvious excuse. They’ve been faced with either the objections and arguments of opponents or the oppressive tyranny of a powerful ruler. This has prevented them from following the right course and made them choose this pernicious path instead.

ʿĪSĀ It was nothing of the kind. People are free to choose and can form their own opinions independently. By so doing they may obtain peace of mind. The source of corruption is not the laws of time or unforeseen happenings. It’s the consequence of faulty education and moral decline, something to which they’re happily reconciled. It’s reached such a stage now that any attempt to extricate themselves from this situation is regarded as a trial and any return to the genuine tenets of the religious law is seen as heresy. The diseases of mutual envy, hatred, discord, and rancor have spread among them; cowardice, lassitude, weakness, dissatisfaction, slackness, tedium, and laziness are now deeply ingrained inside them. As a result we’ve now reached the stage that you’re witnessing. Since we’ve all done these things ourselves, the sin and responsibility is ours; we’re the ones to blame.

PĀSHĀ I realize that you’re exaggerating. But, even if we’re to suppose that the corruption that you describe is widespread, isn’t there some rare individual to point out to you the need for the law to be upheld and to guide you toward the true bases of your faith? Is there no one to offer you such guidance?

ʿĪSĀ Oh yes, we have such judicious counselors. There are scholars, men of virtue, intellectuals, true believers, and pious folk. But, whenever any of them takes a stand, he’s immediately accused of being a deviant heretic. They call him a recalcitrant apostate. Such are the moral postures so deeply ingrained in the souls of people in the grip of conservative tradition. So the forward-looking person thinks twice, and ambitious ideas falter. Virtue is so lacking among us that people’s ideas are scoffed at and their statements are despised. Not only that, but it’s always easier to do nothing rather than take action; a life of ease is more convenient than one of exhaustion. I’ve not been exaggerating in my description, as you’re about to see for yourself.

4.6

ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: While we were conversing like this, the whole place was reverberating with the noise of people surging around in crowds. Then the Judge appeared. He was in the prime of his youth, still quite young, his face radiantly handsome. His stance made him look like a tree branch; with his light, energetic stride he seemed to be flying. When he entered the court, I went to ask when our case was coming up, then returned to my companion. He asked me to continue our conversation, and I duly responded to his request:

ʿĪSĀ The Native Court is the judicial authority that passes judgment on subjects today in all litigations in accordance with the stipulations of the law.

PĀSHĀ Do you mean the Humāyūnī law code?³⁶

ʿĪSĀ The Imperial Code.

PĀSHĀ I don’t remember you speaking in a foreign language or using obscure terms like that before!

ʿĪSĀ I’m doing neither. It’s the Code of Napoleon who was Emperor of France.

PĀSHĀ Have the French returned to Egypt and subjected you to their regime again?

ʿĪSĀ No. We’re the ones who subjected ourselves to their authority. We chose their legal code to replace the Shariah in our country.

PĀSHĀ Are this code’s regulations consistent with those of the noble Shariah? If not, then you are being governed with something which was not sent down to earth by the Almighty.

4.7

ʿĪSĀ That’s what Shariah scholars state in private confidential discussion. However, it seems that it is compatible with the holy law. As proof, one can cite the pronouncement made by a scholar of great eminence who swore a mighty oath on a legal decision which he’d given at the time of its promulgation to the effect that this French code was not at variance with the Islamic holy law, even though there’s no punishment specified in the French code for adultery or homosexuality, provided that the object of affection agrees and is one day over twelve years of age; nor for anyone who commits incest with his mother, provided she assents and is unmarried. This is the legal code which considers a brother guilty of a criminal offense when he risks his life in the defense and protection of his sister’s honor, and the same with the rest of her family beyond her husband; which decrees that debtors shall be compelled to pay interest to creditors; which is willing to accept the testimony of a single woman against a man; and which does not punish the husband who steals from his wife, nor the reverse, nor son from father, nor the reverse.

4.8

The Mixed Courts, which have foreign judges, specialize in investigating litigation between native people and foreigners, and amongst foreigners themselves on matters of civil rights, by which I mean cases involving money. Foreigners have a greater right to wealth because they are serious and work harder. Egyptians on the other hand deserve to be poor because they are negligent and leave everything to foreigners. As a result, the majority of cases in which these courts have competence to pass judgment inevitably result in Egyptians being deprived of their money and property.

Disciplinary Tribunals deal specifically with the punishment of officials who fail to carry out their job properly. They’re usually made up of the same officials who charge the offenders. The severest sentences which they can impose are dismissal from office and loss of livelihood. The remaining degrees of sentence are referred back to be dealt with by the Native Courts.

4.9

Administrative Tribunals deal with the punishment of anyone who contravenes edicts, orders, and decrees. It would take ages to explain.

Military Courts are concerned with the punishment of officers and troops on a charge. They also have authority over people in questions of conscription and the like.

Consular Courts cover the supervision of misdemeanors committed by foreigners against Egyptians and by one foreigner against another of the same nationality. If a foreigner commits a felony against an Egyptian, the courts have no jurisdiction or power of punishment in Egypt; none of these courts which I have explained to you has any special authority in this matter. The offender is returned to his country of birth and homeland for trial. When judges there look into the case, they inevitably end up acquitting the criminal for “lack of confidence in the Egyptian police’s investigation,” “loss of data relevant to the case,” and “lack of sufficient witnesses.”

Special Courts handle punishment for people who assault foreign troops.

PĀSHĀ You keep on giving me curious bits of information and explaining things I don’t understand. When did Egyptians ever assault troops?!

4.10

While we were talking, our case was called. The Pāshā was summoned and entered the court with the Lawyer. The Attorney of the Parquet stood up and asked for a conviction against the accused, in accordance with articles 124 and 126 of the Penal Code, for an assault on a member of the judicial police during the execution of his duty, and with article 346, dealing with misdemeanors, for a minor assault on the Donkeyman.

JUDGE (to the accused) Did you commit the offence with which you have been charged?

LAWYER He did not.

4.11

ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: They then brought me forward as a witness. The Judge proceeded to question me about my knowledge of the whole affair. I responded to his questions.

ʿĪSĀ The whole thing is a most peculiar tale. It started like this—

JUDGE (interrupting) There’s no need to go into details. Just tell me what you know about it.

ʿĪSĀ What I know is that one night at daybreak I was visiting the graveyard in search of spiritual counsel and reflection.

JUDGE (getting irritated) There’s no need to speak at length, just answer the point I asked you.

ʿĪSĀ That’s what I was doing. I was telling you what happened. I saw a man coming out of—

JUDGE (fidgeting) I’ve just told you I won’t accept any elaborate accounts of what happened. Did the accused strike the police officer and the Donkeyman?

ʿĪSĀ The accused did not strike the Donkeyman; he merely pushed him away because the Donkeyman was being so persistent. He didn’t hit the policeman either. He was feeling faint and simply fell on him by accident. He’s quite unaware—

JUDGE All right, that’s enough! Call the Attorney.

4.12

ATTORNEY This Pāshā stands accused of assaulting a member of the police during the course of his duties at the police station, and also of injuring Mursī the Donkeyman. The charge is substantiated by the witnesses’ testimony in the dossier on the case. The court has enough information about all this. On that basis therefore, the Parquet demands that sentence be passed against the accused according to article 346 dealing with misdemeanors. It demands that the court must prove its integrity by showing no mercy in its sentence. The accused’s attitude demands no less. He seems to be under the impression that his status exempts him from the authority of the law and gives him the right to regard the rest of the population as being less important than himself. So he disciplines them himself without regard to their rights and the sanctity of the law. He must undoubtedly be punished severely so as to provide an example and warning to people like him and to ensure that justice will be unbiased. I commit the case to the court.

4.13

JUDGE (to the lawyer) Now the defense, and make it brief.

LAWYER (after clearing his throat and fumbling among his papers) We are indeed amazed that the Attorney of the Parquet has summoned us here today describing us as the accused. What we say, your worship, is that, since desert civilization and the barbarian ages, the origin of the occurrence of crimes according to the law in this world was meant—

JUDGE (in disgust) Would my learned friend be brief and get to the point?

LAWYER It is well known, your worship, that the system of organization in the classes of human society demands—

JUDGE (irritated) My dear Sir, be brief.

LAWYER But the point at issue requires that—

JUDGE (grumbling) There is no need for all this.

LAWYER (flustered) The Attorney has said … (here he quotes something from the Attorney’s speech), however, we claim that, were we to concede for argument’s sake—

JUDGE (annoyed) That’s enough, sir. Get to the point!

LAWYER (stuttering and confused) May it please the court, this accused man who now stands before the Judge is a man of importance and an amir of considerable standing in days of old. His story has been published in the papers; here are the numbers of Miṣbāḥ al-sharq for you to examine.³⁷ While he was walking, a donkeyman kept blocking his path, so he pushed him aside. Now we’re all well aware of how persistent and uncouth donkeymen and uneducated people like them can be—

JUDGE (losing all patience) Listen, my good Sir, I’ve told you to be brief!

LAWYER (sweat pouring off him) When the accused reached the police station, he fainted and fell unintentionally on a policeman out of uniform who was sweeping the station floor. The integrity of the court therefore demands that no attention be paid to the police claims. There can be no charge against the accused whatsoever. He lived in an age different from our own; in his day the whole system was different. He has never heard of the demands of the law, so he is unaware of its regulations. Your worship knows the situation best of all, and if—

JUDGE (pounding the desk with his hand in annoyance) The court has been enlightened, so there’s absolutely no need for all this talk. Get on with your demands.

LAWYER (suppressing his own anger) We have two demands. We ask that the accused be acquitted as a matter of principle. If the court decides otherwise, then we hope that, in accordance with article 352 of the Penal Code, it will show due clemency.

4.14

ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: The Judge proceeded to deliver his verdict. In accordance with the two articles of the Penal Code as cited, he condemned the Pāshā to a year and a half’s imprisonment and fined him five piasters with costs as stipulated by the article on misdemeanors also mentioned above. I found this too much to bear; the world darkened before my eyes. I would certainly have joined my companion in a swoon of astonishment, had not the Lawyer given us every possible assurance that the Pāshā was bound to be acquitted at the Court of Appeal because of the fairness of its members. However, he told us that, besides that, we would have to raise a grievance with the Committee of Surveillance so as to present the case in a favorable light when it was considered at the appeal. “I want you to realize,” he told me, “that the Judge kept interrupting and hurrying me on because he’s been invited to the banquet of a friend of his at 1 p.m. He’s got thirty cases on his agenda, and intends to pass sentence in all of them before his appointment.”

4.15

ʿĪsā ibn Hishām said: God Almighty alone is the possessor of power and might! What could I say other than quote the words of the wise poet, al-Maʿarrī:

I forbid you to pursue controversy or to be seen

as linked to preaching or mosque-imam.

Abandon princedom and using a whip in the city,

thinking it a champion’s sword.

These things have I despised in relatives

and friends alike. It were better to stint your own self.