| Popis: |
Changes in human societies have created various needs that, if not met, would cause distress and constriction. Islamic jurisprudence has therefore paid special attention to meeting the needs of people. Throughout history, this effort is seen in all religious schools, despite differences in their attitudes. However, Sunni jurists have paid more attention to it than Shi'ites, and subsequently, it is more apparent in their fatwas and judicial decrees. One area of focus in meeting needs (ḥᾱjᾱt) is the substantiation of claims in general and the substantiation of crimes in particular. Using the library and analytical-descriptive method, this research proves that since proof is something that makes the truth obvious, seemingly through accepting indications as proof and the legitimacy of inferring religious laws based on the availability of needs, which has been a common way between early jurists in different jurisprudential matters, the possibility of extending it to criminal cases is valid as well, especially if the most proofs or the only ones are based on people's needs. Therefore, relying on needs for permitting the use of new strategies and methods of proving a crime, such as image, voice, and so forth, not only does not contradict the purposes of Shari'a, but is also compatible with actualization of justice. Obviously, in addition to utilizing traditional evidence, new cases have a complementary role, and if they are not available, they have a substitute role as required; also, they can be cited as legal reasons when there is no doubt in the authenticity of describing them to people. |
