The extent of the constitutionality of proving the crimes of theft and banditry by the perpetrator’s confession before the investigation authority or by any scientific means of proofCommentary on the principle issued by the Libyan Supreme Court in its ass

Abstract

The evidentiary system has developed in the crimes of robbery and banditry that are punishable in the Libyan legislation. This development has been noticed since the beginning of the application of the provisions of Islamic law in Libya in the early seventies of the last century to the present time. The matter was settled in the last amendment to the Law of Robbery and Banditry No. 13 of 1996, provided that this crime is proven by the perpetrator's confession at the investigation or trial stage, or by the testimony of two men. The Supreme Court in its assembled circuits ruled that proof is unconstitutional by the perpetrator's confession during the primary investigation stage or any scientific means of evidence; as it violates the provisions of Islamic law.
The study concluded by commenting on this ruling, that the Supreme Court was right in this principle. It recommended that the text of Article 9 of the aforementioned Theft and Banditry Law should be amended so that it is as follows: "proving the crime of robbery and banditry, that is punishable, is based on the perpetrator's confession or the testimony of two witnesses, before the judge who has jurisdiction to adjudicate the case."