Foundations and Conditions for the Realization of Civil Liability of Judges with a Focus on Qawāʿid Fiqhiyyah

Abstract

The civil liability of judges is one of the most important issues in the Islamic justice system, directly linked to the protection of individuals’ rights and public trust in the judicial institution. From the perspective of Islamic jurisprudence, a judge does not possess absolute immunity due to the gravity of his position; therefore, if he commits negligence or fault in issuing a judgment, he is liable to compensate the damages incurred in accordance with jurisprudential maxims such as Lā Ḍarar, Tasbīb, Itlāf, and others. The present article is written with the aim of explaining the foundations and conditions under which the civil liability of judges is realized from a jurisprudential standpoint, with an emphasis on Qawāʿid Fiqhiyyah. The central question of the article is: under what conditions, according to Islamic jurisprudence, is a judge considered civilly liable for damages arising from his ruling? Furthermore, which jurisprudential maxims are applicable in this domain? In response to the above inquiry, the study adopts a jurisprudential–analytical approach to examine the foundations and conditions for the realization of civil liability of judges, including the elements of harm, wrongful act, and causal relationship. The findings indicate that Imamiyyah jurisprudence, while preserving the status and independence of the judge, precisely delineates the boundary between judicial immunity and civil liability through the application of jurisprudential maxims (such as Lā Ḍarar, Tasbīb, Itlāf, the Rule of Beneficence, etc.). According to jurisprudential principles and statutory regulations, including Article 171 of the Constitution, in cases where definite fault is established, the judge is personally liable toward the injured party; however, in cases of unintentional error or mistakes arising from excusable negligence, liability rests with the state.