Can the new judge change the verdict of the previous judge?

Majid Qasem Kordi, lawyer and civil activist in a conversation with a reporter Mehrdar Can the new judge change the verdict of the previous judge? He said: In the hearing system, the court's ruling is the most important and effective point of judicial decision -making; But sometimes there is an interruption between verifying and regulating and signing a lawsuit that can create serious challenges in the path of justice. One of the special cases of these challenges occurs when the judge of the verdict stems from his position before the signature of the lawsuit, whether due to retirement or transfer.

He added: “Recently at a judicial meeting, such a hypothesis has been examined; That is, the verdict was issued by two members of the Court of Appeal, the submission of text for typing, and the retirement of one of the members before the signature. The question now is, is it possible to invoke the verdict under such circumstances or should the process of issuing the ballot from the beginning by the new judges' composition?

Qasim Kordi said: The Supreme Judicial Board, with a detailed distinction between “voters” and “law”, made it clear that the judicial nature of the court's decision lies in it, not in the typed copy of the lawsuit. As long as the verdict has been declared and announced, even if it has not yet been signed, the judge will no longer replace the substantive entry into it. This view is a strong backing in Article 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure It is, where explicitly mentioned, the typical copy of the judgment is nothing but rewriting of the verdict. Therefore, for the Supreme Board, the change of the judge should not lead to a change of judicial decision, as the process of investigation has been completed and the judicial decision has been adopted.

The lawyer continued: In contrast, the majority view is that until the case is signed by the issuing judges, the verdict is not considered the final and therefore the alternative judge can apply his opinion; Even if this opinion is against the former judge. This view, although it reflects the principles of the validity of judicial decisions, can provide a platform for more disputes, especially in cases where the initial judicial will has existed, but has not yet been written and signed.

“The minority's opinion, however, has a middle position,” he said. Emphasizing the necessity of observing the principle of continuity of the voter in the direction of registration and issuance, they believe that the alternative judge must merely adapt the typical text to the initial vote and is not allowed to change the vote; Even if it disagrees with it. Because the moment of issuance is the moment when the judicial decision has been made, not the time of signature.

At the end, Qassim Kordi said: “These disagreements represent one of the major challenges in the process of the hearing. Multi -arrangement Is. The challenge it requires is more explicitly explained in the law of procedure. However, the precedence of the concept of judgment, and the primacy of judicial truth over administrative formalities, as emphasized by the Supreme Council, is still the strongest basis for observing justice and maintaining the unity of judicial procedure.