Features of the Mixed Evidence Approach in the Saudi Evidence System: Analysis and Discussion

Abstract

Recent legal developments have posed substantial challenges in the domain of judicial proof, rendering the adoption of a single evidentiary doctrine practically unviable. In this context, the Saudi legislator has adopted a mixed evidentiary doctrine. In certain statutory provisions, the legislator applies the doctrine of free proof, in accordance with the nature of the case and the type of evidence, while in other provisions, the restricted doctrine of proof is implemented. Accordingly, it is difficult to assert that the legislator relies exclusively on a single doctrine; the mixed doctrine emerges as the most predominant approach within the framework of the Saudi Evidence Law.

The mixed doctrine is fundamentally a synthesis of the free and restricted doctrines of proof. It grants judges discretionary authority to admit, evaluate, and weigh evidence, subject to specific limitations on certain types of evidence in defined circumstances, particularly in cases of high monetary value. This paper primarily seeks to delineate the characteristics that demonstrate the Saudi legislator’s adoption of the mixed evidentiary doctrine, as codified in the Saudi Evidence Law promulgated on 26/05/1443 AH (30/12/2021 CE). The research methodology combines inductive and analytical approaches. The study is structured to first examine instances where the Saudi legislator applies the doctrine of free proof, then to analyze cases adopting the restricted doctrine, culminating in an assessment of situations where the mixed doctrine is applied, with particular emphasis on the legal innovations and regulatory implications emerging from these approaches.