اثر قضايي اقرار ناقص به جرم موجب حد

Judicial Effect of Incomplete Confession to the Crimes Punishable by Had

حقوق جزاي اسلامي براي اثبات جرايم مستوجب حد از طريق اقرار، شرايط خاصي را تعيين كرده كه برخي از آن‌ها نظير بلوغ و عقل به شخص مقر و برخي به نفس اقرار مربوط است. مهم‌‌‌ترين شرايط ناظر بر كيفيت اقرار به نصاب آن برمي‌‌گردد، در اين راستا چنانچه اقارير شخص به نصاب معتبر نرسد، با اقرار ناقص مواجهيم كه بررسي حكم آن موضوع نوشتار كنوني است. در چنين مواردي در عدم ثبوت كيفر حد به لحاظ ناقص بودن اقرار ترديد وجود ندارد، اما مساله اين است كه آيا تعزير مقر نيز منتفي است يا خير؟ در اين باره بين فقها اتفاق نظر وجود ندارد. مشهور فقها به تعزير مقر حكم داده‌اند، لكن برخي با اين نظر مخالفت كرده‌‌اند. در حقوق موضوعه كشور ما نيز قانونگذار مجازات اسلامي متعرض فرض اقرار ناقص ناشي از نرسيدن به نصاب معتبر شده و در اين قسمت از ديدگاه مشهور تبعيت كرده است. در نوشتار حاضر، اقوال فقها را در اين زمينه مطرح كرده و به بررسي ادله آن‌ها پرداخته‌ايم و در اين مورد موضع حقوق كيفري كشورمان را مورد توجه قرار داده‌‌ايم.

To prove crimes punishable by Had through confession, Islamic criminal justice has set particular qualification, some of which such as puberty and wisdom refer to the confessor while some others refer to the confession itself. Most important qualifications, which monitor confession’s quality, is its quorum. In this context, confessor’s confessions do not reach the valid quorum. In such circumstances, we are faced with incomplete confession, which its verdict is the topic of current paper. There is no doubt about the verdict of these cases with respect to instability of Had penalty, which is derived from incomplete confession. But the question is whether, in such cases, confessor’s Taazir is canceled or not? In this regard, there is no consensus among the legislators. Most of legislators have passed a sentence of Taazir on the confessor but some of them have opposed it. In our country’s jurisprudence, the legislator of the Islamic punishment has protested the incomplete confession, which is derived from not reaching the valid quorum, and has followed the dominant point of view. In the current paper, we brought up legislators’ statements about this issue and studied their evidence with more discussion. We have also paid attention to the position of our country’s criminal law toward this issue.