Featured Documents
Ibn al-Ḥārith al-Khushanī, Quḍāt Qurṭuba. Pages 7-8.
In this excerpt from the introduction toQuḍāt Qurṭuba, Khushanī (d. 361/971) reminds his readers of the gravity of the decisions that Cordoban judges, past and present, confronted in their judicial proceedings. In so doing, he buttresses his account of the history of judgeships by providing some context as to the way judges both affected and were affected by the societies in which they operated. Specifically, Khushanī notes that the seriousness with which the role of judge was perceived had a detrimental effect on society, since many avoided judgeships out of fear that they would be punished for their rulings in the afterlife and that the position would leave a mark on their piety in their current lives. In her chapter in Justice and Leadership in Early Islamic Courts, Maribel Fierro uses this source to argue that the way in which potential judges reacted to offers of judgeships or the idea of serving as judges heavily impacted their reputation and image in society, with those who refused being seen as more pious and those who accepted tending to be perceived as seeking to burnish their reputations in the eyes of those in power.
This source is part of the Online Companion to the book Justice and Leadership in Early Islamic Courts, ed. Intisar A. Rabb and Abigail Krasner Balbale(ILSP/HUP 2017)—a collection of primary sources and other material used in and related to the book.
Supreme Court of Iran: General Administration of Uniformity of Judicial Decisions and Publication of Deliberations and Opinions of the General Board (Opinion Number 835)
Contributions by Seyed Bahman Khodadadi.
Supreme Court of Iran: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court (Opinion Number 834)
Contributions by Seyed Bahman Khodadadi.
Popular Documents
Supreme Court of Iran: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court (Opinion Number 834)
(Translation by Seyed Bahman Khodadadi)
Islamic Republic of Iran
Judiciary
Supreme Court of the Country
General Administration of Uniformity of Judicial Decisions and Publication of Deliberations and Opinions of the General Board
Subject: Decision of the Unity of Procedure of the General Board of the Supreme Court
Opinion Number: 834
In accordance with the supplementary note to Article 18 of the Islamic Penal Code and the provisions of Article 2 of the Law on Reducing the Punishment of Imprisonment, approved in 1399, it is mandated that when a court imposes a sentence of imprisonment exceeding the minimum penalty established by law, the court must provide a justification based on the clauses of this article or other relevant legal provisions. The philosophy underlying this law aims to mitigate the severity of imprisonment sentences, thereby establishing the minimum prescribed punishment as the baseline for sentencing.
Consequently, if a court fails to adhere to this requirement and imposes a sentence that exceeds the minimum threshold, such a sentence will be considered to surpass the legally mandated punishment. Under the final provision of paragraph "C" of Article 474 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, this situation provides grounds for the resumption of proceedings.
Thus, the decision rendered by the Thirty-Eighth Branch of the Supreme Court is deemed correct and lawful by the majority of votes, insofar as it aligns with this opinion. This decision is binding on the branches of the Supreme Court, as well as all judicial and non-judicial authorities, in accordance with Article 471 of the Criminal Procedure Law, approved in 1392, along with subsequent amendments and additions in similar cases.
Featured Collections
Online Companion to Mālik's Muwaṭṭaʾ: Translated by Mohammad Fadel & Connell Monette (Harvard Series in Islamic Law, Harvard University Press 2019)
Edited by Mohammad Fadel, Connell Monette. Contributions by Daniel Jacobs, Rami Koujah, Ari Schriber, Cem Tecimer.
Online Companion to Justice and Leadership in Early Islamic Courts, ed. Intisar Rabb & Abigail Balbale (Harvard Series in Islamic Law, Harvard University Press 2017)
Edited by Intisar Rabb, Abigail Krasner Balbale. Contributions by Daniel Jacobs, Abtsam Saleh.
