A Comparative Analysis of Islamic Criminal Law and Modern Forensic Evidence in the Prosecution of Homicide Cases

Abstract

This study examines the complex interplay between Islamic criminal law and modern forensic evidence in the prosecution of homicide cases legal system. Judiciary is uniquely positioned at the intersection of traditional Islamic jurisprudence and contemporary legal practices, often drawing from both frameworks in serious criminal cases. However, Islamic law’s preference for direct witness testimony (shahadah) and confession (iqrar) as primary forms of evidence creates challenges for the admissibility of forensic evidence, which relies on scientific objectivity rather than human observation. Through doctrinal analysis, case studies, and expert interviews with legal practitioners, forensic scientists, and Islamic scholars, this study reveals the ethical, cultural, and procedural barriers that hinder the full integration of forensic science in homicide prosecutions. Findings indicate that while forensic evidence is gaining recognition within judicial system, it is typically used as a supplementary tool rather than as a primary determinant in capital cases, where traditional Islamic evidentiary standards remain dominant. Expert recommendations include formally recognizing forensic evidence as a permissible form of qarinah (circumstantial evidence), enhancing judicial training on forensic science, and conducting public education initiatives to build trust in scientific evidence. This study ultimately suggests that harmonizing Islamic principles with forensic advancements could strengthen legal system, ensuring fairer, more reliable outcomes in criminal justice.