Judge Knowledge in Judicial Proceedings and Its Role In Strengthening Citizens Rights

The permission of a non-innocent judge to rely on his personal knowledge as a judge is one of the long-standing issues recently become a problem which is afflicted by the judiciary. The matter of whether a judge can consider himself as non-reliance in a trial and vote only with his knowledge or whether being adhered to the reasons proposed by both parties in the trial has long been raised in our law and jurists have discussed its practice. Arbitration between the people and the resolution of lawsuits is a provincial position and the judge is in charge of this position. Judgment is a religious position and one of the duties of a comprehensive jurist other than the guardianship. It is one of the prominent pillars of the Islamic government, and perhaps it can be stated with confidence that the most basic duty of any government is resolving hostility and the issue of conflict between citizens as well as justice realization in numerous social areas. If we want to rely merely on jurisprudential and religious standards, we find that in the era of the absence of judicial guardianship, “in vain” is entrusted to a comprehensive jurist, and in principle, judging a non-jurist or not authorized by the jurist is illegitimate and non-influential. Hence, the proposed study has been dedicated to identify the significance, definition, impact and evaluative techniques of judge knowledge and finally, after discussing the relevant issues, it is concluded that in Iranian law, according to existing laws, only science of the evidence is valid. And the judge's personal knowledge is only in charge of controlling function of the other evidence. In other words, it merely stands for the untrue evidence, but cannot try to prove anything.