Judicial principles and studies
Validity of the Search Record under Article (7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure
This study summarizes the conditions rendering a search record valid where information indicated forged electronic seals and computers, and how the owner's final answers and signature affect the procedure's validity per the referenced decision.
Updated: 10 September 2026
Prepared and reviewed by: Ashraf Al-Khawaja
Subject
Examination of the validity of a search record under Article (7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure where information indicated the presence of forged electronic seals and computers used for forgery in the defendant's residence.
Summary
The procedure and the resulting search record are considered valid when these conditions are met: information about forgery tools; the search conducted after obtaining the customs public prosecutor's approval; the owner present and consenting to the search; seizure of the suspected devices; the owner being asked at the end whether anything was lost or damaged and answering no; and the owner voluntarily signing the seizure/search record. Under these circumstances the measure was held valid based on Article (7) and the Court of Cassation decision number ٢٠٢٣/٢٧٤٦. This is an educational summary only; it is not a judicial text or legal advice.
Practical significance
The summary highlights key procedural safeguards that support the validity of a search: securing prosecutor approval when required, ensuring the owner's presence and consent, proper documentation and seizure of devices, and recording the owner's final answers and signature to substantiate the lawfulness of the operation.
Sources and references
Verify the official text and latest amendments before relying on this material professionally.