Document Type : scientific
Authors
1 Assistant Professor/ Department of Jurisprudence and Foundations of Law/ Razavi Islamic Sciences University/ Mashhad/ Iran
2 Ph.D. Student / Department of Jurisprudence and Foundations of Law/ Razavi Islamic Sciences University/ Mashhad/ Iran
Abstract
This study adopts a jurisprudential and legal approach to examine the legitimacy of applying physical and psychological coercion to extract confessions under conditions of necessity. Using a descriptive–analytical method and based on Islamic legal and statutory sources, the author first outlines opposing views on prohibition and permissibility, affirming the primary rule of the prohibition of torture. Subsequently, drawing upon principles such as preserving public order, safeguarding societal rights, the rule of greater interest (qa‘idat al-ahamm), and the interpretative theory of the Guardian Council, the research justifies secondary permissibility of coercion strictly within the limits of necessity. By avoiding the extremes of absolute prohibition and unrestricted permissibility, this study proposes a balanced, restrictive approach that may provide a theoretical basis for revising interrogation regulations and developing necessity-based legal provisions within the Islamic criminal justice policy framework.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)