The Confession of the Accused and Its Evidentiary Effect in Criminal Proceedings

Abstract

Criminal confession is one of the most important elements of proof in criminal proceedings, and it has been described in previous eras as the master of evidence, but this view has changed with the development of the science of criminal evidence, as the practical reality has proven  that confession is considered the best model for the problems of proof, it may not be honest for several reasons, including extracting it by coercion, whether materially or morally, or as a result of false procedures that affect  its validity, and therefore  it should not be exaggerated. The evidentiary value of the confession: The criminal judge must exercise discretion by weighing the confession issued by the accused to determine its real value through the availability of its conditions and its safety from defects that reduce its value. The judge has full freedom to assess the value of the confession of multiple arguments in accordance with the rules of the discretionary power granted to the judge without excesses or negligence. Every crime against which society commits must have evidence to prove before the accused, and the criminal evidence is many and varied, although it is combined by a single unit and the same purpose is to reach the truth related to the incident and attribute it to the accused who committed it, and without this evidence, it is not possible to impose a criminal penalty on the accused. One of these evidences is the confession of the accused who is close to himself to committing the crime, and by his confession, he presents evidence of his guilt. If the confession is true and honest, it is of great importance in the evidence, as it facilitates and breves the proceedings and relieves the conscience of the investigator and the judge.

But not every confession that comes true and truthful, but it is what is surrounded by suspicions and suspicions because it is associated with Ta'zir, influence, or mental or psychological disorder that is far from truthfulness and truth, and here it must be excluded from the field of proof. Therefore, what is known in its essence is the management of the accused by attributing a certain incident to him, so this confession must be specific or clear, and there is no ambiguity in it so that it can be relied upon as evidence in the case.