TY - JOUR
T1 - Ambiguity and Conflict in the Implementation of Evidence Law in Criminal Matters
T2 - a Study of the United Arab Emirates Jurisprudence
AU - Alhammadi, Mohamed Shaker
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.
PY - 2016/9/1
Y1 - 2016/9/1
N2 - Due the lack of the law of evidence in criminal matters in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), it is important to address the issue of the rules of evidence in the UAE where Sharia criminal law is applied along with enacted law of Criminal Procedural Law. The courts’ decisions contradicted each other because of the differences of opinions among the law schools exist in Islamic law in one hand and between the Sharia criminal law and enacted law in the other hand. Further, the Criminal Procedural Law does not state the rules of evidence in clear manner to judges and individuals. The lack of stated rules and procedures and what evidence could be accepted and what cannot are not definite in the UAE legal system. The article will argue that because of the differences in the opinions related to the admission and acceptance of the evidences exist among the Islamic law schools and between the Sharia law and enacted law, the court decisions have contradicted each other and create ambiguities in the field of the evidence in criminal law. The Islamic jurists have different opinions about evidence in fornication crimes, Qasama evidence in qisas, and women and non-Muslim testimonies. Such differences affect the Union Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, the UAE legislator must enact the law of evidence in criminal matters in order to reduce the contradiction between judges’ opinions, clear ambiguities, and protect individual rights as it did with civil and commercial matter.
AB - Due the lack of the law of evidence in criminal matters in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), it is important to address the issue of the rules of evidence in the UAE where Sharia criminal law is applied along with enacted law of Criminal Procedural Law. The courts’ decisions contradicted each other because of the differences of opinions among the law schools exist in Islamic law in one hand and between the Sharia criminal law and enacted law in the other hand. Further, the Criminal Procedural Law does not state the rules of evidence in clear manner to judges and individuals. The lack of stated rules and procedures and what evidence could be accepted and what cannot are not definite in the UAE legal system. The article will argue that because of the differences in the opinions related to the admission and acceptance of the evidences exist among the Islamic law schools and between the Sharia law and enacted law, the court decisions have contradicted each other and create ambiguities in the field of the evidence in criminal law. The Islamic jurists have different opinions about evidence in fornication crimes, Qasama evidence in qisas, and women and non-Muslim testimonies. Such differences affect the Union Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, the UAE legislator must enact the law of evidence in criminal matters in order to reduce the contradiction between judges’ opinions, clear ambiguities, and protect individual rights as it did with civil and commercial matter.
KW - Conflict
KW - Evidence
KW - Islamic criminal law
KW - Sharia
KW - United Arab Emirates
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84950254615&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84950254615&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11417-015-9225-y
DO - 10.1007/s11417-015-9225-y
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84950254615
SN - 1871-0131
VL - 11
SP - 155
EP - 178
JO - Asian Journal of Criminology
JF - Asian Journal of Criminology
IS - 3
ER -