A comparative study of the legal and penal effects of perjury in Imamiah jurisprudence and Iranian and Egyptian law

 Testimony as a proof of a lawsuit is a common feature of the jurisprudence and law systems of Iran and Egypt. And through the comparative understanding of its jurisprudential, legal and penal works in the Imami jurisprudence systems and the laws of Iran and Egypt and introducing the weaknesses and strengths of each of them, this important goal was achieved.The findings of the present research, which was conducted in a comparative manner for the first time and in a descriptive-analytical method, show that forced martyrdom in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and Iranian and Egyptian law has common effects, which can be used to determine the order of effect before issuing a verdict. It and the punishment of a witness by force and for after the issuance of the verdict, violation of the verdict, compensation for damages, resumption of proceedings and the punishments corresponding to the crime resulting from the witnessing by force, which in Iranian jurisprudence and law are ta'zir, hudud, retribution and diat, and in Egyptian law, the punishments are proportional to It concluded misdemeanor crimes. Another comparative finding of this research is the special attention of Imami jurisprudence to the punishment of defamation as well as dealing with family law issues such as divorce and marriage, which are considered to be one of the strengths of this legal system, and the absence of these positive works in the laws of Iran and Egypt is one of the shortcomings and weaknesses. The two mentioned systems have been concluded.