Analytical Examination of the Position of the Presumption of Guilt in Iranian and Canadian Criminal Law

Abstract

One of the most prominent legal principles enshrined in the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran is the presumption of innocence, explicitly stated in Article 37: “The principle is innocence, and no one is considered guilty under the law unless their crime is proven in a competent court.” However, subject to certain exceptions, deviation from the presumption of innocence is recognized under the notion of the presumption of guilt. In both Iranian laws—particularly the Islamic Penal Code—and Canadian criminal law, there exist instances in which, contrary to the presumption of innocence, the defendant must provide evidence to prove their own innocence. Nevertheless, in order to safeguard justice and fairness, the reversal of the burden of proof must remain an exceptional measure, confined to cases explicitly stipulated by law, and it must always be possible to rebut such a presumption.