مدى حجية فراسة القاضى في الإثبات: دراسة مقارنة في الفقة الإسلامي والقانون

Abstract EN

The issue of erudition is a great matter.

If the judge neglects it, he will lose a great deal of right and create a great falsehood, but he must not expand upon it.

If he relies on it without the legal conditions, he will fall into types of injustice and corruption.

If the judge is not a jurist in the signs and evidence of the situation and knowledge of its evidence and in the current and contemporary evidence, then he is a jurist in the details and generalities of the rulings, then he has lost many rights by relying on the apparent without paying attention to the interior and the rest of his circumstances.

Jurisprudence is two jurisprudence, and the judge must have both: jurisprudence in rulings on cosmic events, and jurisprudence in the very reality and conditions of people, by which he distinguishes between the truthful and the false, the right and the false, and then makes a comparison and comparison between this and that.

The Sharia was not revealed except with the aim of justice that separates between creatures, and whoever has knowledge of its purposes, its setting, and a good understanding of it does not need any other policy that extracts the truth from the immoral oppressor.

The discretion of the judge may be more severe than the confession in revealing the truth, and the best evidence of this is the ruling of our masters David and Solomon regarding the two women who claimed the child.

So David ruled for the eldest, and as for Solomon, he said: Bring me a knife and I will cut it between them.

The eldest allowed and the younger said: Do not do it, he is her son, so he ruled for the younger.

As it became clear from this evidence, which is the intelligence and insight of Suleiman, that the consent of the eldest and the pity of the younger and her refusal to consent is that she is the mother, so the evidence was given precedence over the acknowledgment, and this is the truth