عنوان مقاله [English]
In all legal systems, confession has a special place in proving a criminal case, although they do not have the same view on its validity. In the regulations of countries subject to the system of legal reasons, a confession has an intrinsic value, so that the judge is obliged to issue a judgment based solely on the confession for the absolute validity given to it by the legislator. Whereas in countries affected by the system of moral reasons, the confession itself is not valid and its value is as a means of assuring the judge of the event to which the confession has been made.
In the present article, an attempt has been made to examine the validity of the confession in proving the case with a descriptive analytical method. In this regard, it is examined whether a criminal judge can issue a sentence as soon as the accused confesses, and this validity remains until the judge is aware of its inaccuracy? or that the sentence can be issued only on the basis of a confession when the judge is satisfied with it? And basically this persuasion can be based on confession alone or does it need other supporting evidence? In order to answer these questions, while briefly studying the legal system of some Islamic countries, the issue has been specifically examined from the perspective of the Codified regulations, legal doctrine and judicial procedure of our country. The superficial conflict between the approach of the Islamic Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure on this issue has added to the complexity of the issue, which makes it necessary to rely on interpretive methods to accept the Relevant validity of criminal confession.