معلوم نبودن مرتكب صدمات در منازعه و چگونگي جبران خسارت از زيان‌ديده آن

Obscurity of Injurers in a Dispute and the Quality of Compensating the Victim

در احياي جرم منازعه، تبصره 2 مادّه 615 قانون مجازات اسلامي مصوب 1375 اشعار مي‌دارد: مجازاتهاي تعزيري حبس مانع از اجراي مقررات قصاص يا ديه حسب مورد نخواهد شد. در منازعاتي كه مرتكب اصلي صدمات آنها مشخص نيست، پس از سقوط قصاص نوبت به ديه مي‌رسد، اما تكليف مسيول پرداخت ديه و روش تعيين آن مشخص نشده است. چهار نظر مختلف از سوي مراجع رسمي كشور و نيز فقها و حقوقدانان مطرح شده است: مسيوليت بيت المال، تعيين مسيول از طريق قسامه، تعيين مسيول از طريق قرعه و تقسيم مسيوليت بين متنازعين. در اين مقاله جايگاه هر يك از اين نظريات در موضوع مربوط مشخص گرديده است.

In the revival of the crime of dispute, the second note to the article 615 of the the Islamic Punishments Act 1375/1995, provides that: "Taʹziri (discretionary) punishments of prison do not preclude the application of Qesas (retaliation) or diyah (blood money), as the case may be". In the disputes where the principal injurer is unknown, diyah should be paid, instead of applying Qesas; but there is no provision on the person or persons responsible for the payment of diyah as well as on the method for its determination. Four different views have been presented by formal authorities, jurists and fuqaha: (1) assuming the responsibility for bayt al-mal (public treasury), (2) determination of the responsible person by way of Qasamah (an oath pronounced fifty times by the accused and his relatives), (3) determination of the responsible person by lot, and (4) division of responsibility among the parties of a dispute. This article seeks to assess the position of these viewpoints regarding the issue in question.