The purpose of history is to examine and understand past events. Judicial matters also pertain to events that have occurred in the past, and therefore, a judge, in preparing the grounds for their ruling, must necessarily establish the facts of the case from the past. The task of both the judge and the historian is to establish the truth within the temporal framework of the past. Thus, judicial proof inherently takes on a historical nature. The present study, employing a descriptive-analytical method, examines the concept of proof in court from this very perspective. Everything that has been said regarding the possibility or impossibility of historical knowledge is also applicable to judicial knowledge and proof. One cannot approach past realities except through coherent evidence and clues. The most important implication of viewing judicial proof through a historical lens is the realization that the judge, too, faces all the difficulties and challenges of establishing a past event and should not be expected to uncover the truth and rule accordingly under all circumstances. Based on this, it must be accepted that some strategies of proof, such as drawing lots (qur'a) and practical principles (osul al-'amaliyya), lack the capacity to represent reality and, in a way, assist the judge in moving beyond the actual event. Reviving the institution of statutes of limitations and reforming the regulations concerning the finality of judgments and the grounds for retrial. smart justice, criminal justice, judicial system, information technology.