A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF JUDGMENT WRITING UNDER ISLAMIC AND CONVENTIONAL SYSTEMS

The importance of judgment writing as a vehicle for the administration of justice cannot be overemphasized. It is the most secured record system that contains the courts’ verdict on different adjudicated cases, which if carefully kept it lasts for centuries. The paper focuses on the comparative analysis of judgment writing under the Islamic and conventional systems. Thus, through the use of doctrinal method the paper founds that judgment writing under Islamic law and that of the conventional systems are similar even though there are some essential points where the dissimilarities are found. The fundamental difference of the two systems is that; while under Islamic law judgment writing is not obligatory except if requested by the litigants, in the conventional systems it is obligatory prior to its pronouncement. The paper recommends that; Judges should always have at the back of their minds that; judgments have a purpose to communicate to the parties and other stakeholders the decision of the court in regard to the dispute. Similarly, judgments outlive their authors; they act as precedents and should carry the message for prosperity. It shall therefore, be clear and understandable by even those who have lost the case.