Judgment is the title of truth

It is known that a final ruling is considered a statement of truth, so it is not permissible to search for a truth other than what is expressed in this ruling, and therefore it is not permissible to discuss it again to show what is wrong with it. If a person is acquitted by a final and final ruling, it is not permissible to retry him even if it is proven conclusively that he committed the crime. Of which the court acquitted him. Whoever is convicted by a ruling that has ended the case against him, it is not permissible to retry him again, even if other evidence appears that proves beyond doubt that he deserves a more severe punishment, for the purpose of the credibility of the rulings and the stability of legal centers, and it is a necessary idea for every organized society, as it is difficult for society to accept The existence of legal centers that are constantly concerned, because it is the subject of a dispute that never ends. The dispute, no matter how broad and varied the views in it, must stop at a limit, which is the issuance of a ruling that has the force of the thing judged.

Perhaps the only exception allowed by the legislator is the request to reconsider the ruling convicting the accused of a felony or misdemeanor, in order to reach a ruling of his acquittal, under certain conditions and formalities, which the legislator listed exclusively in Article 257 of Criminal Procedure, and the motive that led the legislator to establish this exception is “Considering justice,” and here the legislator preferred the consideration of justice to the consideration of legal stability, because what is most harmful to justice is for the ruling to convict an innocent accused to remain in place despite the fact that His mistake.

Just because “the ruling represents the truth” does not mean that it matches the truth exactly, because the judge rules according to the facts before him, and perhaps one of the opponents can organize his lies and deceive the authority of the court. In this regard, the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, says: “You dispute with me, and perhaps some of you will be more compassionate.” With his proof from someone, and I make up for him according to what I hear from him. Whoever I give something for from his brother should not take it, for I am only cutting off a piece of Hell for him.” The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, spoke the truth.

Thus, the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, declared clearly that his ruling between disputants is just as he is right, but he may be wrong.

Thus, the judge rules based on the papers before him, and he only has to work hard, scrutinize, and investigate as much as he can to reach the truth.

The Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, reinforces this meaning by saying: “If the ruler makes a ruling and is diligent and is correct, he will have two rewards, and if he makes a ruling and is diligent and makes a mistake, then he will have a reward.”

In the end, there is no doubt that the judicial ruling, if it is not a statement of the truth, is at least a revelation of it, according to the facts presented to the court, and the matter should not be left to those with whims to question the judicial rulings for the purpose of undermining the credibility of the rulings, and for the purpose of undermining the stability of the legal centers. Undermining confidence in the integrity of the judiciary and the fairness of its rulings.