Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

---

Oath is one of the ways to prove the murder and injuries inflicted on members, the implementation of which depends on the realization of filth. In jurisprudential principles, oath has been interpreted in order to preserve Muslim blood (caution in temperature) and save human life. And in Q.M.A is the last reason to prove a crime. On the other hand, despite the advances in science, medicine, technology, and the facilitation of crime detection and identification methods through scientific evidence and the science of crime detection and scientific detection of crimes, the issuance of retribution sentence by oath has caused much criticism among jurists, judges and society. And the reversal of the burden of proving the charge in the Penal Code (Article 317) and the obligation of the accused to provide evidence to remove the charge has led to the flow of guilt statistics on the principle of innocence and distortion of the presumption of innocence of the accused. In this article, the practical, scientific and logical challenges of issuing a sentence of retaliation with filth and oath for the accused in a murder that is supported by the principle of innocence will be examined in the light of Quranic evidence and findings of criminal science and medicine.

Keywords: Oath, Retribution, Quranic Evidence, Medical Findings, Crime Statistics, Criminology

Full-Text [PDF 469 kb]   (1519 Downloads)    

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

---

---