Author: Dr. Muhammad Zia-ur-Rahman A‘zami (رحمه الله)
Question:
Some criminals confess during police investigation, but later deny the confession when presented before the judge. What should be the judge’s stance in such a situation? Should he accept the denial, or act upon the prior confession?
Answer:
This matter requires some elaboration:
✔ If the confession relates to the rights of other human beings (ḥuqūq al-‘ibād):
Then retracting such a confession is not permissible for the criminal, even if they claim that their admission was made under certain external pressures. In such cases, the judge should question the investigating officer before whom the confession was made—was the accused coerced, beaten, or otherwise forced to confess?
If no coercion is proven, then the criminal’s denial will merely be considered a claim and will not invalidate the original confession.
Therefore, retracting a confession regarding crimes like theft, assault, or any other offense involving the rights of others is not acceptable.
✔ If the confession pertains to ḥudūd (prescribed punishments) or the rights of Allah:
In this case, the matter is more lenient. According to the majority of scholars, if there is any doubt or uncertainty, then the ḥadd punishment is suspended based on the principle:
“Avoid applying ḥudūd in the presence of doubt.”
✦ If the matter involves people’s rights, the confession remains binding unless coercion is proven.
✦ If the matter pertains solely to Allah’s rights, such as in ḥudūd cases, a retraction may be accepted, and punishment can be suspended due to doubt.
If the confession is verified, or the accused themselves admit to having confessed earlier, then accountability is based on that confession—unless there is proof of coercion sufficient to render the confession void in the eyes of the judge.
[Ibn Baz: Majmu‘ al-Fatawa wa al-Maqalat: 23/205]
❖ Changing of Statement by a Criminal and the Judge’s Ruling Thereon
Question:
Some criminals confess during police investigation, but later deny the confession when presented before the judge. What should be the judge’s stance in such a situation? Should he accept the denial, or act upon the prior confession?
Answer:
This matter requires some elaboration:
✔ If the confession relates to the rights of other human beings (ḥuqūq al-‘ibād):
Then retracting such a confession is not permissible for the criminal, even if they claim that their admission was made under certain external pressures. In such cases, the judge should question the investigating officer before whom the confession was made—was the accused coerced, beaten, or otherwise forced to confess?
If no coercion is proven, then the criminal’s denial will merely be considered a claim and will not invalidate the original confession.
Therefore, retracting a confession regarding crimes like theft, assault, or any other offense involving the rights of others is not acceptable.
✔ If the confession pertains to ḥudūd (prescribed punishments) or the rights of Allah:
In this case, the matter is more lenient. According to the majority of scholars, if there is any doubt or uncertainty, then the ḥadd punishment is suspended based on the principle:
“Avoid applying ḥudūd in the presence of doubt.”
Conclusion:
✦ If the matter involves people’s rights, the confession remains binding unless coercion is proven.
✦ If the matter pertains solely to Allah’s rights, such as in ḥudūd cases, a retraction may be accepted, and punishment can be suspended due to doubt.
If the confession is verified, or the accused themselves admit to having confessed earlier, then accountability is based on that confession—unless there is proof of coercion sufficient to render the confession void in the eyes of the judge.
[Ibn Baz: Majmu‘ al-Fatawa wa al-Maqalat: 23/205]
