Khomeini’s Rushdie fatwa made new law rather than applying existing law

Evidence

But, as with any accusation in Shari‘a as in any system of law, there had to be an arraignment, a trial, confrontation between the accused and his accuser, judicial consideration, verdict and, if appropriate, sentence. No such procedure preceded the death sentence pronounced on Salman Rushdie. There is a hadith, that is, a saying attributed to the Prophet, accepted by Shi’ites and by a small minority of Sunnis in Central Asia, according to which the Prophet said: “If anyone insults me, then any Muslim who hears him must kill him immediately, without any need to refer to the imam or the sultan,” in other words, without needing to refer to the judicial or police authorities. Even in this rather extreme form, the tradition speaks of a spontaneous response by one who actually hears someone insult the Prophet. It says nothing about an arranged killing for a reported insult in an unread book in a far place, and Khomeini clearly was making law rather than following it. — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 582 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Classical Islamic law mandates due process that the Rushdie fatwa bypassed — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting…, 1688; Khomeini exceeded Shari’a procedural norms by making rather than applying law — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting…, 582

Broader Connections

• Khomeini exceeded Shari’a procedural norms by making rather than applying law #corroborates (0.95) — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 582