Jurisprudential and Legal Explanation of the Doctrine of Restricting the Istizhārī Oath to Religious Claims with Reference to Judicial Practice

Authors

    Amin Karimpour Aliabad * Department of Law, Yas.C., Islamic Azad University, Yasuj, Iran 4231891915@iau.ir
    Mohammad Bagher Amerinia Department of Law, Yas.C., Islamic Azad University, Yasuj, Iran.
    Zahra Beheshti Department of Private Law, Yas.C., Islamic Azad University, Yasuj, Iran.
https://doi.org/10.61838/jecjl.291

Keywords:

Istizhārī oath, religious claims, proof of claims, judicial practice

Abstract

The istizhārī oath (confirmatory oath) is one of the recognized evidentiary means in Imāmī jurisprudence and the Iranian legal system, particularly applicable in claims brought against a deceased person. This type of oath is administered after the testimony of two just witnesses in order to strengthen the plaintiff’s right and to eliminate potential doubts that may undermine the credibility of the claim. However, the scope of application and the necessity of attaching the istizhārī oath to claims against the deceased has been a matter of scholarly disagreement among jurists and legal scholars. A group of jurists and some statutory provisions consider the requirement of this oath to be limited exclusively to religious (debt-related) claims against the deceased, while others, by relying on narrations (riwāyāt) and jurisprudential principles, argue for extending its application to claims involving property, usufruct, and other rights. Statutory provisions—especially in the Civil Code and the Code of Civil Procedure—have addressed this issue ambiguously and incompletely, and judicial practice has not provided a clear resolution to this uncertainty. This article, employing a descriptive-analytical method and drawing on jurisprudential and legal studies, examines the textual bases in Islamic jurisprudence, statutory regulations, and judicial practice. It demonstrates that the generality of the narrations and the necessity of safeguarding the plaintiff’s rights justify the requirement of the istizhārī oath in all claims brought against a deceased person. Furthermore, it critiques the restrictive view and analyzes the role of the principle of istishāb (presumption of continuity) in this context. Finally, the study suggests that, given the philosophical foundation of the istizhārī oath, lawmakers and judicial authorities should consider expanding its application in claims against the deceased beyond purely religious (debt-related) matters.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

AbūʿAṭā, M., & Kabīrī, M. (1984). Yamīn (Presumptive Oath): Exception or Rule. Studies in Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, 16(37), 29-54.

ʿĀmilī, M. i. M. (2011). al-Lumʿah al-Dimashqīyah fī Fiqh al-Imāmīyah. Dār al-Turāth al-ʿArabīyah.

Anṣārī, M. (1995). al-Makāṣib (Vol. 6 vols.). World Congress in Commemoration of Shaykh Aʿẓam Anṣārī.

Balḵī, S. J. (2021). Validity of the Presumptive Oath in Proof of a Claim in Fiqh and Law. Nasīm Kawsar Scientific Journal, 1(1), 51-64.

Fakhr al-Muhaqqiqīn, M. i. Ḥ. i. Y. (2010). Iḍāḥ al-Fawāʾid fī Sharḥ Ishkālāt al Qawāʿid. Ismāʿīlīyān Publications.

Fayyūmī, A. i. M. a.-M. al-Miṣbāḥ al Munīr fī Gharīb al Sharḥ al-Kabīr lil-Rāfiʿī. Dār al-Raḍī.

Ḥamīrī, N. i. S. (2003). Shams al-Ulūm wa Dawāʾ al-Kalām al-ʿArab al-Kullām. Dār al-Fikr.

Ḥātamī, Ṣ., & Sāmānī, E. (2021). An Inquiry into the Scope of Taking the Presumptive Oath. Legal Research Quarterly, 27(4), 171-188.

Ibn Fāris, A. i. Z. (1985). Muʿjam Maqāyīs al-Lughah. Publication Office of Islamic Propagation, Qom Seminary.

Imāmī, S. Ḥ. (1996). Civil Law (4th ed.). Islāmīyah Publishing.

Imāmī, S. Ḥ. (2011). Civil Law on Usufruct, Bequests & Inheritance (31st ed.). Islāmīyah Bookstore.

Jubʿī ʿĀmilī, Z. a.-ʿ. (2011). al-Rawḍah al-Bāhīyah fī Sharḥ al Lumʿah al Damashqīyah. Office of Islamic Propagation, Qom Seminary.

Jubrān, M. (2014). al-Rāʾid. Āstan Quds Razavī.

Kāshif al-Ghaṭāʾ, Ḥ. i. J. (2003). Anwār al-Fuqahāʾ; Kitāb al-Qaḍā. Kāshif al-Ghaṭāʾ Institute.

Kātūzīyān, N. (2004). Evidence and Means of Proof. Mīzān Publishing.

Khūʾī, S. A. a.-Q. (2003). Mabānī al-Talkhimah al Minhāj. Ayatollah Khūʾī Publications.

Mohājerī, ʿ. (2001). Commentary on the Civil Procedure Law of General and Revolutionary Courts. Ganj Dānish Publications.

Moḥammadi, P. (2008). Subject-Matter Limitations of Oath in Civil Lawsuits. Legal Research Quarterly, 12(29), 388-427.

Moḥaqqiq Dāmād, S. M. (2027). Principles of Fiqh (Vol. 3). Center for Islamic Science Publication.

Moin, M. (2006). Persian Dictionary. Rāh-Roshd Publishing.

Muʾmin, M. (2003). al-Qaḍāʾ wa al-Shahādāt. Institute for Compilation and Publication of Imam Khomeinī's Works.

Musawi Khūmīnī, R. A. (1987). Taḥrīr al-Wasīlah. Dār al-ʿIlm.

Narāqī, A. i. M. (2020). Risāʾil wa Masāʾil. Congress of Narāqī Scholars Mulla Mahdī & Mulla Aḥmad.

Rashtī, M. Ḥ. A. (2022). Kitāb al-Qaḍā (Vol. 1). Khayyām Publications.

Saʿdī, A. Ḥ. (2029). al-Qāmūs al-Fiqhī (2nd ed.). Dār al-Fikr Publishing.

Shahīd Thānī, Z. a.-D. i. ʿ. (2021). al-Rawḍah al-Bāhīyah fī Sharḥ al Lumʿah al Damashqīyah. Office of Islamic Propagation.

Tabrīzī, J. i. ʿ. (2006). Manhāj al-Ṣāliḥīn. Imam al-Mahdī Association.

Tawkalī, M. M. (2019). Brief Civil Procedure Code. Maktūb Ākhar Publications.

Downloads

Published

2026-12-22

Submitted

2025-06-24

Revised

2025-11-03

Accepted

2025-11-09

Issue

Section

مقالات

How to Cite

Karimpour Aliabad, A., Mohammad Bagher Amerinia, & Beheshti, Z. . (1405). Jurisprudential and Legal Explanation of the Doctrine of Restricting the Istizhārī Oath to Religious Claims with Reference to Judicial Practice. The Encyclopedia of Comparative Jurisprudence and Law, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.61838/jecjl.291

Similar Articles

1-10 of 108

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.