Jail is no substitute for blood money

Convicted offenders who owe blood money, but cannot pay it, would be better off working to pay off their debts than being locked up.

One can only hope Joseph Abutan can get on with his life. The Philippines national was convicted of accidentally killing his wife in a traffic accident in 2009. After Mr Abutan served his one-year sentence, he spent 17 more months in jail because he could not pay the Dh200,000 blood money to his spouse's family. Early this week, Dubai Police announced that the department would pay the money on humanitarian grounds.

It is not infrequent for authorities or charities to contribute to pay blood money debts. But, as cases covered in The National show, there are still inmates who remain in jail after their sentences expire because they cannot pay the fines levied by the courts.

Earlier this week, we reported on the case of Sakeer Hussain, an Indian driver convicted of accidentally killing a coworker. Mr Hussain has served more than two years despite being sentenced to just three months. An entire community has mobilised in his support, but the Dh200,000 blood money settlement has still been prohibitive.

As a financial punishment, blood money has served a traditional role that makes sense: punish the criminal, and benefit the victim or his or her family at the same time.

But judging from similar cases that have appeared on our pages, many of these cases involve low-paid workers who simply cannot afford the fine. If the point is to force them to pay, then prison cannot be the solution.

There is a relevant precedent in a Federal Supreme Court case from 1994: "Judges have the right to keep a defendant in jail until he or she pays blood money if he or she is shown to be financially able and procrastinating," read the Court's ruling. But that judgment should not extend to cases where the incarcerated simply cannot pay.

In car accidents, part of the solution could be insurance, but often people are not aware of their rights and obligations before it is too late. Some defendants have appealed cases all the way to the high courts, which have found that insurance companies are actually liable in some cases.

Where there is no one who can pay the obligation - be it the convicted, insurance companies or philanthropic authorities or donors - it does not benefit anyone for inmates to loiter in jail. There may be a risk that people who owe blood money debts will abscond, but in most cases it makes more sense to release them with the financial obligation and start them on a repayment programme.