I discussed this part with a very knowledgable person - may God bless him - and these are his main points in proving the points for this (and a response to those who claim it is wrong):


- What is Islamically needed is to prove certainty, and what was readily available to the Muslims from proof long ago all contained mistakes or did not produce certinty. But witnesses and pregnancy did.


- The Hadith from Omar Ibn Al-Khattab that talks about proving Zina by pregnancy: "Verily, stoning is an obligation in the Book of Allah to be inflicted on married men and women who commit adultery, when ther crime is proven, evident by pregnancy, r through the confession (of the adulterer).' Agreed upon." (Bulugh Al-Maram Book 10, Hadith 1209)


- Technology has advanced throughout the years and now we are provided with technology that provides a similar amount of certainty as the witnesses. Such as CCTV Camera or forensic evidence which were not available to them but if they were then they would surly use it.


- Some opinions who attempt to disprove this claim can often be neo-literalist and not everything should be taken from them. Especially when the Fatwa clearly contradicts etablished reason. The Quran & Sunnah never contradict reason. Similar scholars made Fatwas proving that the Quran suports a heliocentric model or that it is Flat; but these do not have to be taken.


- Both Darul-Ifta of Egypt & Jordan say that when thre is doubt on whom a baby maybe attribued to (of parents) then alongside the Shari'i evidences, modern technology can be usd to prove it too such as DNA profiling.


- We see in the Quran the story of Prophet Yusf A.S. It was proven that he did not assault he woman of Al-Azeez and it was determined by the riped apart clothe. Since it was ripped apart from behind this only indicates that Yusuf A.S did not do anything to her but rather she was the one who attempted to assault him. Ther were no cameras or witnesses in that situation.


- DNA profiling combined with other physical examinations makes it highly unlikely that the charge of rape is false. Such as if he took her by force they can find physical marks on both her body and the place she was rapd in; or if she was kidnapped and drugge then they can find traces of the drugs in her blood. Forensics also take into consideration how likely it could have happened given their locations, for example if it was proven the guy was in a different place at the time of the (Alleged) assault its impossible that he did anything.


- In the cases of child rape or even rape of a virgin it is highly evident that there will be signs of violence or tearing on the body left hat changed it negatively.


- Current rape investigations are technologies with evidences agreed upon by scientists & worldwide law courts. It is not the job of the Mufti to criticize something he does not specialize in. These things should be left to the police to prove. It is only the job of the Mufti to only approve of whether it is Islamically accepted or not.


- DNA Profiling saved the lives of hundreds of people before from false witnesses, esp when the DNA did not match that of a rapist. So it is clear that it is an effective method unlike what some people may claim.


- Overall there is no problem in something which the aim of is the same as what the Shariah intended to aim for too (Certainity that the rape accusations are either true or false).