خلاصة:
The fundamental question in civil litigation since ancient times is whether the judge can also act to discover the truth or whether his role is limited to the season of hostility given the reasons given by the parties.Interrogation or civil interrogation means questioning the plaintiffs by summoning them personally. Similarly, interrogation in criminal matters can lead to the acquisition of evidence, statistics or confession from the statements of the parties.At present, the only legal article from which civil interrogation or interrogation can be deduced in Iranian law is Article 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which allows the judge to take any action and investigation in order to discover the truth.Because the interrogation is not explicitly provided for in the codified laws of Iran and has not been explained by the doctrine, it is appropriate that the legislature, like the countries of France and Lebanon, which have precise and clear rules regarding the interrogation, legislate in It is important to take action.
ملخص الجهاز:
In Iranian law, the legislator, by enacting Article 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has granted this right to the judge, so that in cases where he deems the personal presence of the plaintiff or the defendant necessary, he may proceed to summon them personally.
In Lebanon, based on Article 218, the parties to the lawsuit have the right to request interrogation; unlike the explicit statement of the Lebanese legislator, the French Code of Civil Procedure is silent on this matter.
The Lebanese legislator, in Article 221 of the Lebanese Code of Civil Procedure, has referred to the condition of capacity and stated that in the event of the incapacity of one of the parties, the interrogation shall be conducted with their guardian or legal representative, and this same provision has allowed the court to interrogate a discerning minor (saghir-e momayyez) in matters for which they are authorized.
Article 220 of the Lebanese Code of Civil Procedure identifies the condition of the relevance of the requested question to the lawsuit as part of the conditions for interrogation and states: "If the court observes that the case does not require interrogation, or that the facts considered for interrogation by the party 16 are not productive, or that the acceptance of these matters is not legally permissible, it shall reject the request for interrogation.
Article 226 of the Lebanese Code of Civil Procedure also does not consider the presence of the person being questioned as a principle necessity, except in cases of confrontation or at the request of one of the parties 32 to the lawsuit.
(
, 
, 
)
