knowledge of the judge

Witness testimony is a crucial piece of evidence in judicial proceedings used to substantiate or refute claims. From an Islamic legal perspective, such testimony is considered valid only if the witness is deemed just (adl), a condition that must be verified by the judge. To establish this condition, Islamic jurists have outlined various methods, including the judge’s knowledge, the witness’s reputation, examination, and general demeanor. These methods are traditionally employed to assess witness credibility in judicial proceedings. However, in contemporary times, due to factors such as population growth, the judge’s limited familiarity with the litigants, and the potential for collusion and abuse, verifying witness justice has become increasingly challenging for judges. This research proposes a novel approach to verify witness justice by leveraging the judicial system itself. The central question is whether the traditional methods of establishing witness justice, namely the judge’s personal investigation, can be replaced by a system-based approach. To answer this question, an analytical-ijtihadi approach has been employed, utilizing library resources to examine various scenarios that may arise within such a system. The first scenario involves the system providing the judge with definitive knowledge regarding the witness’s justice. In this case, the validity and feasibility of replacing the traditional method can be substantiated by principles such as the inherent authority of knowledge and the practices of rational individuals. The second scenario concerns situations where the system’s findings provide the judge with a guess of the witness’s justice. This can be justified by the concept of specific or general guess, both of which hold legal validity. However, in the third scenario, where the system’s information does not provide sufficient evidence for the judge to form a judgment, the proposed method lacks validity. Finally, the research delves into various sub-issues and potential objections related to this proposed approach.

In line with the development and expansion of the scope of criminal law studies in Iran, the legislator, by recognizing the jurisprudential-legal establishment of “judge’s knowledge” in the field of proving crimes, has provided an opportunity for courts to use technical and technological evidence to achieve criminal justice in cases related to hudud sexual crimes. Therefore, despite the apparent limitation of criminal evidence in Article 160 of the Islamic Penal Code of 2013, it is possible, with the existence of evidence based on the judge’s knowledge, to speak of an unlimited set of technical and technological clues and indications that lead to judicial knowledge. This study, while examining the legal status of technical and technological evidence and their probative power in hudud sexual crimes, explains the discussed evidence as one of the methods of obtaining judicial knowledge in Iran’s legislative-judicial criminal policy. One of the results of this study is that resorting to the mentioned evidence in hudud not only does not contradict religious and legal standards but also updates and dynamizes the system of evidence in this field, providing better and more appropriate criminal justice.

Reflecting on Iranian jurisprudential and legal sources and texts in the area of evidence to prove the case, indicates gender differences in it, which is the place of reflection and analysis in this article. From the point of view of jurisprudence and law, the general rule is based on the fact that women's gender has no effect on their criminal responsibility, but in the matter of proving a crime through evidence of testimony, confession and the judge's knowledge, gender is influential and there are differences between men and women. The legislator has determined the type of evidence at the time of ratification, depending on the gender of a man or a woman in a specific or common crime. In this research, the effect of women's gender on proofs is investigated, and each of the proofs is discussed separately. This research, which was carried out using descriptive and analytical method and using library sources, seeks to find a suitable answer to the question of what effect does gender have on the type or quality of Evidence substantiation? What is obtained from the evidence and documentation indicates that women's gender has an effect on testimony, but it has no effect on the judge's knowledge and confession.

This research, which was carried out using a "case study" method, concerns the issuance and execution of the death sentence for a person who has a record of six previous convictions for drinking alcohol. The evidence of this ruling is Article 136 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2012, which stipulates: "If someone commits the same type of crime that causes hadd (i.e. punishment is precisely determined) three times, and each time the punishment for that crime is inflicted upon him, his hadd is death in the fourth instance. The evidence to prove this charge is "the knowledge of the judge" and it has passed the different stages of the prosecutor's office, the criminal court 1 and the Supreme Court. In the analytical review of this case it has been determined that some of the rules governing preliminary investigation of hadd punishment have been overlooked by the bailiffs and the judicial authorities. Especially, the existence of eight misgivings identified in these studies indicate that the case in question is subject to the ruling of " Rule of Dar’(elimination)" which is enshrined in articles 120 and 121 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013. In conclusion, three suggestions have been presented to improve the activity of bailiffs and judges, as well as amendment of Article 136 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013 regarding the death penalty for repeating crimes in which the punishment is hadd.

The knowledge of the judge is one of the proofs of the claim in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and criminal law of Iran. The knowledge may be obtained from the contents of the case or from the judge's sensory observations. Despite the fundamental differences of Islamic penal policy in response to prescribed and punitive crimes, specifically crimes against chastity, using the knowledge of the judge will lead to a policy of tolerance or strict criminal punishment for these crimes. This article examines the views of the jurists in this respect and concludes that the general policy in crimes against chastity is forgiveness, impunity and tolerance, but in the case of rape due to the violation of public decency and deprivation of security of individuals and society, the policy of intolerance and maximum acceptance of the knowledge of the judge is dominated as one of the most important reasons to prove the claim. Also, Iran's criminal law has taken the same procedure in response to this crime.

One of the issues that has been widely discussed in Mahdavi narrations is judgment without evidence and based on fact. The appearance of the narrations is used, which is a kind of judgment with God-given knowledge and in an extraordinary way. According to this study, Imam Zaman uses the judgment of Davoodi at least at some point in his rule, and such judgment plays an important role in promoting justice in a society after the emergence and reduction of crime. And because of that, Imam al-Zaman (as) will try and punish special and professional criminals, which will be a deterrent for others as well. Such a judgment is necessary, although the general practice of the judiciary in the rule of that Imam is to judge on the basis of appearances and evidence. This research, by the method of library collection and data analysis, first reports the validity of this issue and proves the accuracy of the narrations, and after analyzing and expressing the functions, will answer the doubts of this issue.

One of the main and key aspects of governance in the political system is the position of judge. Judgment is the most obvious position that is very important from a legal, jurisprudential and social point of view and has many challenges in the governmental organization. It is important because it shows the commitment to the law and the seriousness in doing so in protecting all human rights. In any government, the judge and the judiciary and fair judgment have a high status and great importance. The judge is the executor of the law and the guardian of justice. Judgment is an important matter that among its various subjects, the issue of independence and attributes such as knowledge and being a mujtahid is important and valuable, because the existence of these conditions is the prelude to the realization of justice. For many, the question may arise as to whether the judge should be independent or not and whether the judge's knowledge should be at the level of ijtihad or not. And what are the evidences and principles that distinguish an independent judge and a mujtahid? According to the questions raised, the present study, which has been conducted by the method of documentary and library study, with the aim of jurisprudential and legal study of the independence, science and ijtihad of judges seeks to answer these questions.

Along with the development and expansion of the field of criminal law studies in Iran, the legislator, by recognizing the establishment of the jurisprudential-legal "science of the judge" in the field of proving crimes, has created opportunities for courts to be able to use technical reasons as well as technological reasons. , To implement criminal justice in cases related to sexual offenses subject to hadd. Therefore, despite the apparent confinement of evidence in criminal cases in Article 160 of the Islamic Penal Code adopted in 1392, in the presence of evidence based on the knowledge of the judge, we can speak of an unlimited set of evidence and technical and technological emirates that lead to jurisprudence. . The present study, while examining the legal status of technical and technological evidences and their probative power in sexual crimes subject to hadd, has explained the evidences in question as one of the methods of obtaining judicial knowledge in the legislative-judicial criminal policy of Iran. One of the results of the present study is that resorting to the aforementioned evidence in the limits, not only does not contradict the sharia and legal standards, but also causes the system of evidence to be updated and dynamic and will lead to a better and more worthy realization of criminal justice. Construction. 

Islam’s legal system has been established independent from other three great legal systems in the world. And this independence can be spoken of in the field of positive differential policies as an important part ofthis legal system and based on several rational arguments. Thus¡ in the present article¡ the author tries to depict the principle of equality in the system of proofs as the primary rule; and then¡ he will use the principle of individualizing as the secondary and particular- in other words¡ exceptional- principle to depict a model of judging proofs in the Islamic Law as well as Iranian Law. As a matter of fact¡ so far¡ these principles have been used together with the principle of equality concerning punishments. In the present study¡ however¡ they have been spoken of in the field of the system of proofs in the Islamic penal law and this shows that development of proofs is not restricted to the severity of crime; and the type of crime¡ victim¡ and sometimes even the conditions of the victim should be taken into account in the differential system of proofs in Islam. Findings of this study and its analyses show that these differential policies¡ as compared to other legal systems such as that of France¡ enjoy a more extensive field; and¡ in most non-Islamic legal systems¡ either there is no such differentiation in positive policies at all or only severity of crime- has been taken as the axis.

It is not permissible to obtain proofs through non-Shari and illegitimate methods. These proofs will lose their validity if they fail to reveal the intended ruling by Sharia. Otherwise they will be valid based on the generic tone of reasons in hadith. Generality of the law also indicates the validity of these proofs.