ارزش اثباتی محتوی دیجیتال مشکوک به دیپ‌فیک به عنوان مبادی علم قاضی در دعاوی خانواده

The proliferation of realistic digital content, including fabricated images, audio and videos, has challenged its reliability and admissibility in judicial proceedings. The central question is how digital content, once its authenticity, integrity and attribution have been established, can contribute to judicial knowledge, and how deepfake technology affects its reliability in family disputes and criminal complaints arising from family relationships. Using an analytical and inferential approach grounded in Islamic jurisprudence and legal sources, this study examines the evidentiary value of digital content and the conditions under which it can contribute to judicial knowledge, with particular emphasis on deepfakes. It distinguishes the use of such content as evidence from its use as a means of committing an offence or causing intolerable hardship. The findings indicate that apparent realism alone is insufficient to establish judicial knowledge. Evidentiary value depends on technical authenticity, integrity and chain of custody, attribution of the content or conduct, and the relevance of its meaning to the matter in dispute. In matters suchas qadhf (imputation of zina or sodomy), liʿān (mutual imprecation) and denial of paternity, digital content cannot replace the specific forms of proof prescribed for these matters In claims involving intolerable hardship or certain aspects of spousal conduct, however, authenticated and attributable content supported by corroborating circumstances may contribute to judicial knowledge.Where digital content itself serves as a means of criminal conduct, threats, reputational harm or harm within family relationships, the attribution of liability and its consequences are distinct from the content’s evidentiary value and require separate consideration Accordingly,assessment in this field requires a distinction between content’s authenticityits admissibility as evidence and its role in harmful or criminal conduct. Judicial knowledge must rest on the totality of reliable circumstantial evidence following technical and legal assessment of the content