I know this is not an issue of our immediate importance, we have many more important issues at our hand. But as Islam orders us to get muslim prisoners at the hand of kuffar released , may be least we can do is Dua for Sister afia , Sister umm e Muhammad and many prisioners like them.
Today marks 9th anniversary when our agencies sold a daughter for dollars.
Case Background
Background:
- Dr. Aafia earned her bachelor’s degree in biology from MIT and earned her doctorate from Brandeis University.
- Her doctoral thesis was “Learning through Imitation” in which she included her research on improving learning techniques for children.
- She was totally dedicated to her children and her academic studies revolved around how children learn.
- Unfortunately, Dr. Aafia became a victim of domestic violence during her marriage.
- In 2002, Dr. Aafia’s husband moved the family to Pakistan and soon divorced her while she was pregnant with the couple’s third child. He remarried within weeks of giving her the divorce.
- Dr. Aafia is now 38 years old, a mother of three children (2 are US citizens), divorced, and is a Pakistani citizen.
Circumstances Surrounding the Case:
Briefly, here are some of the basic circumstances of Dr. Aafia’s case:
- In March 2003, Dr. Aafia and her three children, Ahmad (boy), six years old and an American citizen, Maryum (girl), four years old and also an American citizen, and Suleman (boy), six months old, kidnapped by unknown authorities in Karachi, Pakistan.
- On March 31, 2003 it was reported by the Pakistani media that Dr. Aafia had been arrested and turned over to representatives of the United States. In early April, this was confirmed on NBC Nightly News, among other media outlets.
- There was communication to the mother of Dr. Aafia from purported “agencies” that the family members should be quiet if they want to see Aafia returned alive.
- By the year 2008, many believed that after five years of being disappeared Dr. Aafia and her three children were most likely dead.
- Then, in July of 2008, the same month Dr. Aafia “appeared” in Ghazni, two events occurred:
- British human-rights reporter, Yvonne Ridley and former Bagram detainee and British citizen, Moazem Begg, publicly spoke about a woman in Bagram screaming, a woman whom they named the “Grey Lady of Bagram”
- A petition for habeas corpus was filed with the Pakistan High Court in Islamabad requesting that the court order the Pakistani government to free Dr. Aafia or to even admit that they were then detaining her.
What Supporters and Family Believe?:
This is what the family and many other supporters in the US and in Pakistan believe:
- That Dr. Aafia was (and is) an innocent person who was abducted for money or based on false allegations or false conclusions derived from an unknown source.
- That, unfortunately, all evidence required for her defense and establishing legal proof of her detention would require full cooperation by the U.S. and Pakistani governments, and intelligence agencies, a cooperation that seems impossible.
- That documents incriminating Dr. Aafia are either false documents or produced under torture or threat of harm to her children.
- That the Afghan police were looking for Dr. Aafia and her son based on a description given by an anonymous tip on the day she was detained in Ghazni.
- That had Dr. Aafia and her son been shot on sight on suspicion of being suicide bombers, this would have led to a convenient closure of the case of Aafia Siddiqui at a time when a petition for habeas corpus was pending in the High Court of Pakistan in Islamabad. Note that this court had been asked to order then-President Musharraf and the Pakistani government (which would include anyone working with them) to release her or to reveal her whereabouts.
- That Dr. Aafia, who spoke no local language in Ghazni, was dressed so conspicuously in a manner to be easily identified and shot on sight as a (falsely-accused) suicide bomber as a part of someone else’s plan.
- The forensic and scientific evidence presented during the trial in New York proved that Dr. Aafia could not have committed the crimes for which she was charged, still the jury disregarded the evidence and chose to agree with the prosecution due to fear and prejudice.
What Dr. Aafia’s detractors want?:
- We are asked to believe that Dr. Aafia, a respectable Pakistani woman in all ways, is now the first and only female terrorist from Pakistan; was voluntarily hiding under cover with three children acting as a terror field operative while at the same time leaving her family to believe for five years that she and her three children were dead.
- We are asked to believe that Dr. Aafia arranged this just after her father died, after finding out her marriage was disintegrating, and after leaving her widowed mother alone in Pakistan. It is absolutely not plausible and does not even fit the traditional profile by law enforcement of female or male terrorists from that part of the world.
Current Situation:
- In February, 2010, Dr. Aafia was tried and convicted in a US Federal court on charges of attempted murder and assaulting US servicemen in Ghazni, Afghanistan. The official charges against Dr. Aafia were that she assaulted U.S. soldiers in Ghazni, Afghanistan, with one of the servicemen’s own rifles, while she was in their custody, waiting to be interrogated by them. No US personnel were hurt but Dr. Aafia was shot and suffered serious injuries including brain damage. Dr Aafia categorically denies these charges.
- There were NO terrorism charges against Dr. Aafia.
- According to several legal observers, the trial of Dr. Aafia was littered with many inconsistencies and defects, chief among them being many rulings by the judge that strongly favored the prosecution and prejudiced the case against the defense. These ranged from allowing much hearsay evidence and jury instructions that favored the prosecution. In addition, Dr. Aafia was not represented by lawyers of her choosing and faced constant innuendos of terrorism when she was not charged with any such offense.
- As a result of Judge Richard Berman’s framing of the case in a negative light, Dr Aafia was convicted despite ALL physical and forensic evidence that showed that she could not have committed the acts she was charged with.
- On September 23, 2010, Dr. Aafia was sentenced to 86 years in prison by Judge Richard Berman who overruled the jury’s determination that there was any pre-meditation. The judge also added enhancements that were not part of either the charges against Dr. Aafia nor part of the conviction.
- After her sentencing, Dr. Aafia aasked that people not take any revenge or get emotional. She asked that those who have wronged her be forgiven as she forgave Judge Berman.
- Dr. Aafia remains imprisoned, now at the notorious Federal Medical Center (FMC) in Carswell, Fort Worth, Texas where she is kept in the Special housing unit (SHU) which is the most severe confinement category. She is still not allowed communication with anyone she trusts, including family members.
Dr. Aafia’s Children:
- Dr. Aafia’s oldest son, Ahmed, who is a U.S. citizen by birth, was found in Ghazni, Afghanistan after thinking he was an orphan and, in late 2008, was reunited with Dr. Aafia’s sister in Karachi, Pakistan.
- Dr. Aafia’s daughter, Maryum, also a US citizen by birth, was mysteriously “dropped off” in April 2010 near her aunt’s house in Karachi after being missing for 7 years. She was traumatized and spoke only American accented English.
- Dr. Aafia’s youngest child, Suleman, a boy who would now be about seven years old, remains missing; and is feared dead.
What Supporters and Family Seek?
- Dr. Aafia, an MIT and Brandeis laureate, is now a broken and mere shell of her former self. Under these circumstances, family and supporters are asking the U.S. government to repatriate Dr. Aafia back to her home in Pakistan.
- The Pakistani government has formally made this request as this matter has become a major public issue and has support across Pakistani political and social spectrums. Supporters and people of conscience should press government officials to get Dr. Aafia reunited with her family as soon as possible.
- An independent, open (with full public access and disclosure) and serious investigation should be undertaken into what happened to Dr. Aafia over the missing years and the whereabouts of her remaining child, so that this does not happen to other innocents.
- Dr Aafia’s family and supporters still have hope in fair minded peoples committed to mercy and justice to raise their voices. Justice for the past, for all Dr. Aafia has suffered, is hard to imagine.
- All that is asked for the future is for some measure of correction. If Dr. Aafia is repatriated, perhaps she can pick up some fragments of life with her family.
**Islamic Ahkam Regarding Prisoners
**
The scholars have many positions on this subject, but they are agreed upon it being obligatory to free the Muslim prisoners of war, by either sacrificing ourselves or by our wealth.
Ibn Qudamah Al-Hanbali said (Al-Mughni 9/228):
It is obligatory to pay the ransom money for the Muslim prisoners, if it is possible.
This was also said by Umar bin Abdul-Aziz, Imam Malik and Ishaq. It has been narrated from Ibn Zubair that he asked Al-Hassan bin Ali about freeing the prisoners. Al-Hassan replied: “It is obligatory upon the entire Earth on which he was fighting.”
It has been established from the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) that he said: “Feed the hungry, visit the sick and free the prisoner.”
It has been narrated by Saeed through his chain from Hibban bin Jabalah, that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) said:“Indeed it is obligatory upon the Muslims to free their captives or to pay their ransoms.”
The Messenger of Allah (SAWS) wrote a letter advising the Muhajireen and Ansar: “To restrain the enemy soldiers in their fortresses and to free the Muslim captives with goodness.”
The Messenger of Allah (SAWS) paid the ransom for two Muslim men with a man who he (SAWS) had taken from Bani Uqail, and he paid the ransom for two people with a woman who was given as a gift by Salamah bin Al-Akwa.
These evidences show how the prisoners were freed, not specifying any particular way. However, if we are able to free the prisoners through a particular way then it becomes obligatory upon us do take that course. This is what the jurists did and they said: “It is compulsory upon us to even wage war in order to release the Muslim captives, if we are in a position to wage war.”
**Imam An-Nawawi **said (Ar-Raudah 10/216):
If the enemy capture a Muslim or two, then is it equivalent to invading a Muslim land? There are two opinions on this. The first opinion is no, because the troubling of one Muslim soldier is insignificant. The more correct and other opinion of the two is yes, because the sanctity of a single Muslim is greater than the sanctity of an entire state. Therefore, if the Islamic State is close to the location where the prisoner was captured, then it should release the prisoner and exact a fine from those who have captured him. (Otherwise, paying the ransom money is wajib (compulsory) if we can free the prisoner by it).
Al-Qurtubi (2/26) said:
Our scholars have said that ransoming the prisoners with money is wajib (obligatory), even if one dirham does not remain in the Islamic Treasury. Ibn Khuwaiz Mindad has confirmed the existence of verses of the Quran that indicate the obligation of releasing the prisoners. It has also been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) that he ransomed the prisoners and ordered others to do so as well. This has also been course taken by the Muslims and their consensus that it is incumbent to free the prisoners by taking money from the Islamic Treasury, and if that is not possible, then it becomes compulsory as a collective duty: if one person executes it, the sin is lifted from the shoulders of the rest of the Muslims.
Related from the author of The Book of Jihad and Fighting in Islamic Politics from the author of As-Seer Al-Kabeer with its commentary (3/1583):
It is OK to exchange both male and female non-Muslim prisoners who are in the hands of the Muslims, for Muslim prisoners. This is the opinion held by Abu Yusuf, Muhammad and it is the strongest opinion held by Abu Hanifah (may Allah be pleased with him).
Ibn Juzai Al-Maliki said (Page 172 of Qawaneen Al-Ahkam Ash-Shar’iyyah):
It is necessary to rescue the Muslim prisoners from the hands of the disbelievers by fighting them. If the Muslims are unable to do so, then it becomes compulsory upon them to pay the ransom money. It is incumbent on a rich person to ransom himself and on the Imam (leader), to pay the ransom money for the poor people, from the Islamic Treasury. If they still fall short, then it becomes compulsory to take from the wealth of all the Muslims, even if it finishes their wealth.
**Al-Izz bin Abdus-Salam **said (Page 97 from Ahkam Al-Jihad wa Fadailihi):
Rescuing the Muslim prisoners from the hands of the disbelievers is one of the best means of coming close to Allah. Some of the scholars have said: “If even one Muslim is captured, it becomes compulsory upon us to persevere in fighting the disbelieving enemy until we either free the Muslim captives or destroy the disbelieving enemy. Therefore, what do you say if they capture a large number of Muslims!?”
Ibn Nuhaas transmits from An-Nawawi in Ar-Raudah (2/838 from Mashari Al-Ashwaq ila Masari’ Al-Ushaq):
If the enemy capture a Muslim or two, then is it equivalent to invading a Muslim land? There are two opinions on this. The first opinion is no, because the troubling of one Muslim soldier is insignificant. The more correct and other opinion of the two is yes, because the sanctity of a single Muslim is greater than the sanctity of an entire state.
**Sheikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah **said (Al-Fatawa 28/635):
Freeing the prisoners is one of the greatest compulsory deeds and spending ransom money and other means towards that, is one of the greatest ways to come close to Allah.
**Ibn Al-Arabi **said (Ahkam Al-Quran 2/440):
Unless the prisoners are from the weak and oppressed, then the State should be steadfast in their cause. To help them with our bodies is wajib (obligatory) and no one should remain behind until they all leave to rescue them or spend all of their wealth to rescue them. This was said by Imam Malik and all of the scholars. Verily, to Allah we belong and to Him we must return, if we leave our brothers in the hands of the enemy and they have wealth, weapons, number, strength and authority.
Ibn Hajar Al-Haithami said (Tuhfah Al-Muhtaj 9/237) said:
If the enemy captures a single Muslim, it becomes wajib (obligatory) on every one who has the ability, to rush to their rescue (even without seeking anyone’s permission). It is apparent that it is compulsory on everyone, similar to the situation where the enemy invades our land. Moreover, saving our brothers is of a higher priority, as the sanctity of a Muslim is greater (than the sanctity of a State).
**Abu Bakr Al-Jassas **(Ahkam Al-Quran 1/58) said:
The ransoming of Muslim prisoners is one of the obligatory deeds that has been established upon us. Al-Hajjaj bin Artaah narrated about this ruling from his grandfather, that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) wrote a letter to the Muhajireen and Ansar, to detain the enemy prisoners in their stronghold, ransom their prisoners for something befitting and for peacemaking amongst the Muslims. Mansoor narrated from Shaqeeq bin Salamah from Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) said: “Feed the hungry, spread the greeting (salam), visit the sick and free the prisoner.”
These two serve as evidences for freeing the prisoners because the word, ‘Al-Aani’ in Arabic refers to prisoner. Imran bin Hussain and Salamah bin Al-Akwa’ narrated that the Messenger of Allah (SAWS) ransomed pagans for Muslim prisoners.
**Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani **said (Fath Al-Bari 6/167):
The saying of Imam Al-Bukhari, ‘The Chapter on Freeing Prisoners’ refers to freeing them from the hands of the enemy by money or by other means. The word ‘Al-Fakak’, where the fa (Arabic letter) from the word has a fatha (it is also permissible for it to take a kasrah), means to free. This word is mentioned in two hadiths. The first one is the hadith of Abu Musa: ***“Free the prisoner.” ***Ibn Battal said that freeing the prisoners is compulsory on a collective duty (Fard Kifayah). This opinion is also held by the majority of the scholars.
