Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic Jurisprudence and Law, Faculty of Theology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
2
PhD student in Islamic Jurisprudence and Principles of Law, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran
10.22034/ils.2024.18290.1112
Abstract
In the judicial process, if one of the parties to a dispute or a witness speaks a language unknown to the judge, or if a document serving as evidence is in a foreign language, a translator assumes the responsibility of translating it. This article seeks to address the fundamental question: What is the jurisprudential and legal nature of translation in judicial matters? Among Islamic jurists, four perspectives exist regarding the nature of translation: (1) translation as testimony upon testimony, (2) translation as a report, (3) translation as recourse to an expert, and (4) translation as guardianship. However, this study also examines three additional aspects. Regardless of the prevalence of the first opinion among Imami jurists, adopting any of these views entails various consequences, such as the requirement for multiple translators, the necessity of their masculinity, and their moral integrity. Over time, Iranian legislators have demonstrated a dual approach to this issue, sometimes considering the conditions of testimony applicable to translation and sometimes not. However, the latest approach seems to prioritize the view of translation as recourse to an expert. This descriptive-analytical study, after reviewing the aspects and opinions in credible religious sources, ultimately prioritizes the third opinion.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)