Does cutting off the left hand suffice when the victim requested the cutting of the right hand, and the perpetrator offered the left?
Chapter on Retaliation (Qawad)
Al-Mughni
Book of Wounds
Primary text
According to the opinion of Abu Bakr, if the executioner cuts off the left hand when the right was demanded, this suffices, regardless of whether the executioner knew it was the left hand or not. According to Ibn Hamid, if the perpetrator intentionally offered the left hand knowing it was not the one demanded (the right) and knowing it would not suffice for the retribution (Qisas), then the cutter has no liability for compensation (Diyya) or retribution (Qisas) because the offer constituted a voluntary tender, which can substitute for explicit consent. This contrasts with cutting a silent person's hand, as no tender was made. Furthermore, if the executioner performed the cut while aware of the error, he is subject to disciplinary punishment ('Uthr) for infringing upon the right of Allah (Haqq Allah).
Supporting text
There are two views regarding whether the retribution (Qisas) for the right hand is waived. One view holds it is waived because the cutting of the left hand was an encroachment, and cutting one hand prevents cutting the other, similar to cutting the left hand of a thief instead of the right. The second view holds it is not waived, which is the position of Al-Shafi'i. They differentiate Qisas from Hadd (statutory punishment) based on three points: Hadd is based on waiver, unlike Qisas; the left hand is not cut for theft if the right is missing because it voids the general benefit of the prescribed punishment, unlike Qisas; and if the hand is lost due to disease or Qisas, the cutting for theft is waived, unlike Qisas where compensation may follow.