The general nature of the law, and at times its ambiguity, obscurity, inconsistency, or silence, necessitate interpretation. The Islamic Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code are affected by these issues. The present article conducts a desk-based and theoretical study of the articles of these laws. In cases of doubt regarding the intention of the legislator, one must first attempt to discern the legislator’s real intention. However, if such an attempt proves unsuccessful, the case should be construed in favor of the defendant. In establishing the commission of a crime, if the arguments for accusation are insufficient or there is no evidence against the defendant to support a conviction, the principle of innocence must be followed. Essentially, doubt in such cases is equivalent to failure to establish the crime and must therefore be resolved in favor of the defendant.
Moazzenzadegan, H. A. and Gholam Ali Zade, H. (2010). An Analytical Study of the Position of interpretation of Doubts in favor of the Defendant in Criminal Law. Journal of Islamic Law Research, 10(2), 141-159. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1252
MLA
Moazzenzadegan, H. A. , and Gholam Ali Zade, H. . "An Analytical Study of the Position of interpretation of Doubts in favor of the Defendant in Criminal Law", Journal of Islamic Law Research, 10, 2, 2010, 141-159. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1252
HARVARD
Moazzenzadegan, H. A., Gholam Ali Zade, H. (2010). 'An Analytical Study of the Position of interpretation of Doubts in favor of the Defendant in Criminal Law', Journal of Islamic Law Research, 10(2), pp. 141-159. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1252
CHICAGO
H. A. Moazzenzadegan and H. Gholam Ali Zade, "An Analytical Study of the Position of interpretation of Doubts in favor of the Defendant in Criminal Law," Journal of Islamic Law Research, 10 2 (2010): 141-159, doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1252
VANCOUVER
Moazzenzadegan, H. A., Gholam Ali Zade, H. An Analytical Study of the Position of interpretation of Doubts in favor of the Defendant in Criminal Law. Journal of Islamic Law Research, 2010; 10(2): 141-159. doi: 10.30497/law.2012.1252
)
