Denying confession before a judge in Saudi Arabia
Once any accused person is arrested for any crime, the police begin investigating the accused and hearing his statements regarding what is attributed to him. Finally, he is fingerprinted and signed on his statements, and either he is released or not, depending on the type of case and its seriousness. After that comes the interrogation stage before the Public Prosecution; the investigator asks the accused questions and takes his statements on them. Here, the accused’s signature and fingerprint are also taken on the interrogation report.
In most cases, the accused acknowledges the validity of the accusation attributed to him, whether in the hearing report or the interrogation report. However, after this stage and before the case is referred to court, the question always arises in the mind of the accused or his family: ”Is it possible to deny the confession before the judge?“.
This is what we will answer in detail in our current article.
What is the confession meant here?
Confession means: the statements made by the accused, whether before the investigating authorities or the Public Prosecution. These statements include a confession from him of the crime attributed to him. This confession is called by the term “non-judicial confession“, as stipulated in Article (14) of the Saudi Evidence System, which states: “The confession is non-judicial if it does not take place before the court, or during the course of another lawsuit“.
What is worth noting in this regard is that just because a confession is called a non-judicial confession does not mean that it has no validity before the judge, as this is absolutely not true. Rather, this non-judicial confession has complete validity, and the judge can base his entire conviction on it.
The fundamental difference between a non-judicial confession and a judicial confession is that the latter is almost impossible to invalidate or refute in any way, unlike a non-judicial confession, which is nothing more than a means of proof, and the accused or his lawyer can prove its invalidity or invalidity, such as claiming coercion or forgery.
The extent to which it is permissible to deny a confession to a judge
There is no doubt that the accused has the right to deny before the judge, and he cannot be forced to confess to the court, but the question here is “Does denial lead to the denial of the charge and the acquittal?”.
To answer this question, we must differentiate between two types of punishment resulting from the crime under accusation:
1- If the punishment is a severe punishment:
That is, the crime requires the imposition of one of the limits of God Almighty, such as: (the limit of adultery, the limit of banditry, the limit of slander, and the limit of intoxication); The accused has the right to deny the confession before the judge, and this denial will have a direct impact on the failure to apply the punishment to the accused.
The basis for this is what the Supreme Court decided in many of its principles, including Principle No. (1133), which stipulated that: “The basic principle is that the considered suspicion has an effect in warding off the punishment” (MQD): (393/5), (2/8/1415).
2- If the punishment is discretionary or regular:
Any penalty determined by the judge or a penalty decided under the provisions of the system; The basic principle is that the accused’s denial of the confession before the judge will not have any effect in denying the charge against him according to the confession issued by him before the investigating or interrogation authorities, however; If the accused adheres to any plea that would invalidate the confession; Then the judge will not pay attention to the confession and will not consider it evidence of conviction, and one of the most important defenses that can be upheld in this regard is It is the claim that a confession was obtained under duress. If the accused or his lawyer can prove that the confession was taken from him by force or pressure, then this confession will not be taken into account.
The basis for this is what is stated in Judicial Principle No. (2285): “Mere confession if it is surrounded by suspicion, there will be consideration” (MQD): (647/3), (22/12/1420), and Judicial Principle No. (2286): “If the defendant is forced to confess, and there are traces in it that give rise to suspicion, then this is a precaution” (MQD): (647/3), (22/12/1420), and Judicial Principle No. (2287): “If it is proven that the confession was obtained through coercion, then no ruling is based on it” (MQD): (111/3), (9/2/1421).
The conclusion
Ultimately, denying a confession before a judge remains a fundamental right of the accused, as it allows him to defend himself and prove his innocence in accordance with what the Saudi judicial system decides. Litigants’ awareness of these rights and understanding the mechanisms of denial of recognition is an important means of achieving justice and protecting rights.
If you are looking for someone to defend your rights with competence and experience, the office of lawyer Abdul Majeed Al Rashid provides you with legal advice and full support in various cases
No comments