The Presumption of Innocence: A Biblical Principle Undermined by Man-Made Law
In my previous article, I discussed the concept of pre-adjudication and how it contradicts the biblical model of justice. In this follow-up, I want to focus on the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” and how it is undermined by man-made law.
The biblical model of justice presupposes the principle of “innocent until proven guilty.” This means that an accused person is considered innocent until proven otherwise through a fair and thorough adjudication process. In the Bible, we see this principle upheld in various passages. For example, Deuteronomy 19:15 states, “A single witness may not testify against another person for any trespass or sin that he commits. A matter may be legally established only on the testimony of two or three witnesses” (NET).
This verse emphasizes the importance of having multiple witnesses to establish guilt, ensuring that the accused is not condemned based on a single person’s testimony. In addition, this passage highlights the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
However, man-made law often operates on the opposite principle, punishing individuals before they have been proven guilty. While the stated ideal in our current system is “innocent until proven guilty,” in practice, man-made law makes that a pipedream. This is evident in the way legislation from state capitals and Washington, D.C. is applied. Enforcement agents can fine or punish people without an accuser bringing their case before a judge. For example, a person can be fined for driving without a license or having an expired vehicle registration, even though there is no victim or accuser in the situation (and no Law of God was violated). The “state” has created laws that punish individuals preemptively, without the need for an accusation or a fair trial. If the accused wants to appeal, they must go through a costly and confusing process, which is contrary to biblical justice.
Another modern example of this is the practice of civil asset forfeiture, where law enforcement agencies can seize property suspected of being involved in criminal activity, even without charging the owner with a crime. This practice flips the burden of proof, requiring the owner to prove their innocence to reclaim their property, rather than the accuser proving their guilt. This presumption of guilt has led to many innocent people losing their property without due process, highlighting the dangers of straying from the biblical model of justice.
In contrast, the biblical model places the burden of proof on the accuser, who must bring their case before a judge. The magistrate is then responsible for conducting a diligent inquiry to determine the guilt or innocence of the accused (Deuteronomy 17:4). This process ensures that the accused is treated as innocent until proven guilty, and it prevents the punishment (e.g., fines, regulatory fees, etc.) of the righteous without a fair trial.
Proverbs 18:17 further emphasizes the importance of a fair trial: “The first to state his case seems right, until his opponent begins to cross-examine him.” This verse acknowledges that the first person to present their case may seem convincing, but it is essential to hear from the other party and examine the evidence thoroughly before making a judgment.
In conclusion, the principle of “innocent until proven guilty” is a crucial aspect of the biblical model of justice. Man-made law, with its pre-adjudication and punishment before a trial (where the accuser would be required to bring the charge to the magistrate), contradicts this principle and leads to the oppression of the innocent. As Christians, we must advocate for a return to the biblical model of justice, where the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty through a fair and thorough adjudication process.
