ارزش اثباتی قرائن در حقوق دادرسی (کیفری، مدنی و اداری)

امروزه در عمل قضاوت به یاری قرینه‌ها صورت می‌گیرد و لذا به ‌نظر می‌رسد که تهیه مقدمات نظریه و نظریه‌سازی در این‌باره ضرورت دارد. در عین حال به انگاره کمابیش همگان تفاوتی میان قرینه و اماره وجود ندارد اما به‌نظر می‌رسد میان اماره و قرینه در فرآیند اثبات دعوا (اعم از کیفری، مدنی و اداری) تفاوت وجود دارد. قرینه‌ها در مرتبه پایین‌تری از اماره‌ها قرار دارند. امری که هر چند نویسندگان حقوقی در نظر به آن کم‌تر التفات یافته‌اند اما دادرسان و کارآگاهان در عمل آن را بسیار به کار بسته‌اند، که البته شایسته است این به کارگیری تا سطح معرفت نظری نیز ارتقاء یابد. این نوشته تحلیلی، توصیفی و انتقادی در جهت تعیین جایگاه قرینه در نظام اثباتی دلایل است و بر آن است که ضمن تفاوت آن با اماره و تعریف قرینه و انواع آن (قرینه دور، قرینه نزدیک) ارزش اثباتی آن را در مراحل مختلف دادرسی‌های کیفری، مدنی و اداری با بهره‌گیری از آرای قضایی بحث کند.

the role of indices in evidence law: implications for civil, criminal, and administrative cases

this article delves into the distinct roles and implications of indices in evidence law within civil, criminal, and administrative lawsuits. while iranian myths and epics, such as the story of siavash and the prophet joseph in the quran, exemplify the use of presumptions and indices as evidence, there has been limited scholarly focus in persian on the differences between these two concepts. this paper aims to analyze these concepts, clarify their respective functions, and explore their impact on legal proceedings. despite the legislative tendency to conflate indices with presumptions, it is important to recognize that they hold different positions within the hierarchy of evidence.historically, presumptions and indices have served as evidence in judgments, suggesting their long-standing use in various legal systems. however, persian literature lacks an in-depth analysis of how these concepts differ from traditional forms of evidence. this article seeks to fill that gap by exploring the terminologies involved and their specific applications in lawsuits. although legislators often pair indices with presumptions, a distinction exists: indices do not carry the same weight as presumptions. literature reviewin persian legal literature, numerous books on evidence law explain the probative value of presumptions. dr. nasser katouzian, for example, has written articles on the subject in the journal of law and political science (summer 2004, university of tehran, pp. 125-154). however, there is little discussion of the distinction between presumptions and indices, nor an exploration of the probative value of indices.materials and methodsthis study adopts a descriptive-analytical approach and utilizes library research methods to examine the relevant data. the aim is to assess the differences between presumptions and indices, analyze their respective roles in legal proceedings, and discuss how these differences affect the application of evidence law in practice.results and discussiontoday, judicial decisions—particularly in criminal procedures—often rely on indices. this widespread use of indices underscores the need for a deeper theoretical analysis of their function. while many assume that there is no meaningful difference between indices and presumptions, it becomes evident that these two concepts differ significantly within the law of evidence. indices are ranked lower than presumptions in terms of their evidentiary value.although legal scholars have paid comparatively little attention to this distinction, indices have been extensively utilized in practice by judges and investigators. this practical usage warrants a more comprehensive theoretical understanding.