Comparison of criminal and civil liability of judges in Iran, Egypt and Islamic jurisprudence

Message:
Abstract:

Although in the recent centuries, especially from the middle of the 19th century onwards, the discussion of the judge's responsibility in the laws of the countries of the world has received attention, but it must be acknowledged that this topic has a history in Imamiyyah jurisprudence and has been discussed as a guarantor of the judge. , so that in cases of intentional fault of the judge, the guarantee is on him, and in cases of his unintentional mistakes and errors, the guarantee is burdened on the treasury. However, until after the Islamic Revolution and the approval of Article 171 of the Constitution of Iran, due to several reasons, no attention was paid to the guarantee and responsibility of the judge. Even after the drafting and approval of Article 171 of the Constitution, until now due to the lack of a specific law in line with the implementation of Article 171, the judge's responsibility as stated in this article has not been able to fulfill itself, and for this reason, the judicial procedure in this case is very poor. is In this article, an attempt is made to study the concept, types, elements and theories of difference regarding the judge's responsibility and the jurisprudential foundations of this responsibility, and especially, his intentional fault and mistake that causes injury and damage, in a comparative manner in the laws of Iran and Egypt. take

Language:
Persian
Published:
Journal of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, Volume:16 Issue: 2, 2024
Pages:
290 to 311
https://magiran.com/p2793449