Find in Library

Accepting an active or neutral role for the judge regarding the factual issues is rooted in the acceptance of the originality of the individual or the community. Article 156 of the Constitution has accepted a middle theory and considered the judiciary as a supporter of individual and social rights, but the legislator in Article 199 of the Civil Procedure like the followers of the school of “originality of community”, has allowed the judge to conduct any investigation necessary to discover the truth in addition to examining the evidences of the parties. Despite the above mentioned article, there is a reason for disagreement on the possibility of accumulation of proofs. The question of the current research, which is done with a descriptive and analytical method, is about the possibility and conditions of accumulation of proofs. In legal proceedings, when there is an incomplete evidence in the case and the acquisition of evidence does not conflict with other provisions, the judge is allowed to do so. In criminal cases, the judge is allowed to acquire proofs, except for those related to pure divine rights. Despite the fact that the jurists do not express an explicit opinion about the problem, in jurisprudence there are some evidences on the necessity of justice and other evidences on the necessity of impartiality of the judge. In some jurisprudential opinions, it has been emphasized on the need to achieve justice to the extent that the judge is not exposed to the accusation of bias, which is a good theory. In the words of Imam Khomeini, he has not explicitly commented on the acquisition of proof, but he also pointed out the impartiality of the judge on the one hand and emphasized the necessity of discovering the truth on the other hand. Based on this, we can consider the selected point of view regarding the acquisition of proof to be in accordance with the Imam's opinion.