and thus resembles one who is in the Abode of Islam.

Section: The measure of the punishment is eighty lashes if the accuser is a free person, based on the verse and consensus, whether he is a man or a woman. It is required that the person be an adult, sane, and not under coercion, as these are conditions for every hadd punishment.

1566 - Issue: He said: "If the accused person demands [justice] and the accuser has no evidence."

The summary of this is that two conditions are considered for the administration of the hadd after the completion of the accusation according to its requirements. The first is the demand of the accused party, because it is their right, and it shall not be executed before their demand, like all their other rights. The second is that the accuser does not produce evidence, according to the saying of Allah the Almighty: "And those who accuse chaste women and then do not produce four witnesses, lash them with eighty lashes." He thus stipulated the absence of evidence for their lashing. Similarly, the absence of an admission from the accused is required, because it is of the same significance as evidence. If the accuser is a spouse, a third condition is considered, which is their refusal to perform lian (imprecation). We know of no disagreement regarding all of this. Furthermore, the persistence of the claimant until the administration of the hadd is required; if he demands it then forgives the hadd, it lapses. This is the view of al-Shafi'i and Abu Thawr. Al-Hasan and the People of Opinion said: "It does not lapse by his forgiveness, because it is a hadd punishment, and it does not lapse by forgiveness, like other hadd punishments." Our position is that it is a right that is not administered except after the demand of the human being for its fulfillment, therefore it lapses by his forgiveness, like qisas (retribution), and it differs from other hadd punishments; for in those, the demand for their administration is not considered. The hadd of theft only requires the demand for the stolen item, not the demand for the administration of the hadd. Furthermore, they said: "His claim is valid, he is made to swear an oath regarding it, the judge rules based on his own knowledge, and his retraction is not accepted after the confession." This indicates that it is a right of a human being.