A Comparative Analysis of Shaykh Saduq and Shaykh Ansari's Theories on the Rule of 'Tadra' al-Hudud bi'l-Shubuhat' and Its Application in Iranian Criminal Law

Abstract

This article provides a comparative analysis of the theories of two prominent Shia jurists, Shaykh Saduq and Shaykh Ansari, regarding the rule of "Tadra' al-Hudud bi'l-Shubuhat" and its impact on Iranian criminal law. The rule "Tadra' al-Hudud bi'l-Shubuhat" is a fundamental principle in Islamic jurisprudence, playing a crucial role in preventing unjust application of Hudud punishments. Both Shaykh Saduq and Shaykh Ansari emphasize the necessity of applying this rule in cases of doubt, but their approaches differ in interpretation and reasoning. While Shaykh Saduq relies more on textual sources and Hadiths, Shaykh Ansari incorporates both textual evidence and rational arguments. This article critically examines these theories and the position of the "Tadra' al-Hudud bi'l-Shubuhat" rule in Iranian criminal law, demonstrating how this principle is applied within the Iranian legal system and its impact on judicial cases. Additionally, the article offers recommendations for improving and strengthening criminal laws based on the findings of this research.