THE TYPES OF JUDICIAL OATHS IN ISLAMIC JURISPRUDENCE: DEFINITIONS, CLASSIFICATIONS, AND RULINGS

Abstract

The judicial oath is considered one of the most important means of evidence resorted to in the absence of testimony in judicial disputes. It has garnered significant attention from scholars in classical jurisprudence and legal texts. However, discussions on this topic have not been isolated from oaths in general. With the emergence of specialized writings in modern jurisprudence, judicial oaths began to receive particular focus, leading to studies on their types, classifications, and procedures. This research explores the modern types of judicial oaths within judicial assemblies from the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence. It defines these oaths and examines their manifestations or parallels in Islamic legal thought, highlighting their evidentiary authority and the views of the four major Islamic schools of thought regarding them. The study adopts a classification of judicial oaths based on the individual taking the oath and explains the rationale behind this approach. It also addresses the roles and purposes of oaths within this framework. The methodology relies on analyzing the opinions of classical jurists using primary references from each school of thought. When the discussions on oaths in a particular reference were insufficient, the study referred to secondary sources within the same school, adhering to explanations of the core texts. Additionally, contemporary juristic and legal perspectives were considered. The research recommends further in-depth studies on certain forms of oaths, such as the oath of witnesses, due to the complexity and diversity of opinions surrounding it. This form has evolved from being a cause to invalidate testimony to becoming a mandatory requirement for witnesses.