Analisis Kontra Wacana dalam Tafsir Hudud tentang Hukuman Potong Tangan dan Hak Asasi Manusia (HAM)

Abstract

Purpose – This paper analyzes the counter-discourse between the Qur’anic interpretation of hudud punishment,
specifically hand amputation for theft, and the principles of Human Rights (HR). The core issue addressed is the
tension between the textual authority of Surah Al-Maidah verse 38, which provides a strong legal basis for hudud, and
the universal values of human dignity and individual freedom upheld in modern legal frameworks.
Design/methodology/approach – This study employs a qualitative library-based method, utilizing a comparative
hermeneutical approach between classical and contemporary exegesis. It explores the spectrum of interpretations—
from the literalist and uncompromising views of scholars such as Sayyid Qutb to more contextual and reformist
readings that emphasize justice, compassion, and social welfare in line with human rights principles.
Findings – The analysis reveals that the application of hudud punishments, particularly hand amputation, is not an
immutable legal prescription but rather a moral symbol of deterrence within a specific socio-historical context.
Contemporary interpretations propose a shift from corporal punishment toward restorative justice and socio-economic
rehabilitation, aligning with the objectives of maqasid al-shari‘ah and modern human rights values.
Originality/value – The novelty of this paper lies in its critical synthesis between Islamic legal hermeneutics and
human rights discourse. It offers a balanced framework that upholds the sanctity of divine revelation while promoting
a humane and pluralistic understanding of Islamic law in modern society.