Abstract

There is no doubt that justice represents the goal that legislators seek to achieve through legal rules, the means of which is truth and its goal, and this goal cannot be achieved without searching through diligent efforts to achieve justice between litigants and establish rights between disputants, because the ultimate goal of Criminal procedures that rely on evidence as their focus are the search for the truth by the competent judge through the case before him. The main goal that the criminal judiciary seeks is to reach the truth, and to issue rulings and decisions based on this truth. The role of the criminal judge in criminal cases has what distinguishes it. About the role of the judge in the civil case, and this comes from the difference in the nature of civil proof from criminal proof. Criminal proof goes beyond its meaning to everything that leads to revealing the truth, that is, establishing evidence of the occurrence of the crime and its attribution to an accused. In other words, it is extracting the truth of the facts in the case. The study of this subject is not devoid of importance, as the judge is not merely an implementer of the legal text as much as he has a discretionary authority through which he can deal with the circumstances of each crime separately, and the study of this subject Addressing the issue of the actual truth in the criminal case, that is, in terms of the possibility of transforming the doubt with which the criminal case began into certainty on which the ruling is based, the importance of the topic is related to its purpose and at the same time is linked to the importance of both the Penal Code and the principles of criminal trials and their difference from the civil law and civil proceedings. And civil proof in terms of the goal to be achieved by these laws. In studying the research topic, we will follow the comparative analytical research method for both Iraqi and Egyptian law, within a research plan consisting of two requirements.