In the judicial system of Islam, testimony is one of the most important evidence of proof. The validity of the testimony depends on the credibility and plurality of the witness, so that if the testimony is lacking in terms and conditions, its credibility will be shaken. In this paper, we examine the "probative value of testimony is lacking conditions" and, after exposing the conflicts and ambiguities of the domestic laws regarding the probative value of this type of testimony, we refer to its jurisprudential background. In jurisprudence, there is no independent discussion under this heading, but from the context of the jurists' terms of testimony, it can be concluded that, despite the fact that some writers regard it as worthy of a judicial title, this type of testimony lacks any probative value, since testimony in jurisprudence, Is an independent evidence, which is accepted under the name of Byenehn Shari'a with all its conditions, and essentially no any value for lacking Binh-i-Shi'ain. By comparing the issue with awareness of the uniformity of the relevant regulations in other countries, the value of this type of testimony, like all other evidence, depends on judge, however, due to the fundamental difference in the basis of this type of evidence in the law of Iran and those countries Compliance with other countries is not recommended.