This study explores the issue of a defendant’s confession—considered a form of legal evidence in Islamic law—when obtained through unlawful means, specifically through torture. The aim is to demonstrate the prohibition of such unlawful methods in Islam for extracting confessions and to establish the invalidity and inadmissibility of any confession obtained thereby.

The study addresses the concept of confession (iqrār), clarifying its meaning, its relation to admission, and its significance as a means of proof. It also outlines the general conditions for its validity, its evidentiary value, and the main rulings related to retraction of confessions.

The second chapter focuses on the use of torture to extract confessions, its definition and forms, and the views of Islamic jurists on torturing the accused—whether or not the accusation is supported by circumstantial evidence—as well as the evidentiary value of confessions obtained through such means. The study further examines the perspectives of both classical Islamic jurists and modern legal scholars within positive law.

The study concludes that extracting confessions through unlawful means is prohibited, and that any confession obtained under such conditions is invalid in both Islamic jurisprudence and judicial practice. It recommends the prevention of this inhumane phenomenon and the adoption of all necessary measures to prohibit and limit its use, except in cases of extreme necessity.