Spiritual Evidence Governing the Proof of Crime in Light of Sharīʿa Principles and Judicial Ethics

Abstract

The system of evidentiary proof in Iranian criminal law, influenced by Imami jurisprudence, is based on a hybrid approach in which both explicitly prescribed sharīʿa and statutory evidence, as well as the judge’s knowledge, play a fundamental role in the discovery of truth. With the advancement of science and emerging technologies, forms of evidence such as expert opinions, forensic medicine, genetic fingerprinting, and forensic phonetics have been introduced as modern tools for proving crime; these typically operate within the framework of judicial presumptions and contribute to the formation of the judge’s knowledge. The central issue of this study is to clarify the status and probative value of spiritual and modern scientific evidence in light of jurisprudential standards and judicial ethics, with particular emphasis on the distinction between ḥaqq Allāh (rights of God) and ḥaqq al-nās (rights of individuals). The findings indicate that in matters concerning ḥaqq al-nās, the judge’s knowledge has a methodological (instrumental) nature, and the discovery of factual truth through any customary and reliable means—including emerging forms of evidence—is compatible with sharīʿa principles and ethical standards. By contrast, in matters pertaining to ḥaqq Allāh, evidentiary rules are predominantly substantive in nature, and adherence to explicitly prescribed forms of proof—especially in light of the principles of mitigation and concealment—takes precedence. Accordingly, the use of modern scientific evidence, insofar as it leads to customary certainty and the judge’s inner conviction, is not only consistent with sharīʿa and judicial ethics but also serves the realization of criminal justice and the protection of individual rights.