Hakuna mahakama ya rufaa, wala mahakama ya kassation, kwa hiyo mfumo wa mahakama, kwa upande wa namna kesi zinavyoshughulikiwa, ni wa ngazi moja. Iwapo hakimu ametoa hukumu, hukumu hiyo inakuwa ya lazima, na haiwezi kamwe kubatilishwa kwa hukumu ya hakimu mwingine isipokuwa ikiwa alihukumu kwa kitu kisicho cha Uislamu, au alipingana na maandishi yaliyo wazi kutoka Qur'ani, Sunnah au Ijmaa' ya Maswahaba, au ikadhihirika kwamba alitoa hukumu inayopingana na hali halisi ya jambo lenyewe.

There is no court of appeal, and no court of cassation, so the judiciary, as far as the method by which the cases are treated, is of a single level. If the judge pronounced a verdict, it would become binding, and it cannot ever be annulled by the verdict of another judge unless he ruled by other than Islam, or contradicted a definite text from the Quran, Sunnah or Ijmaa’ of the companions, or it became clear that he gave a verdict that contradicted the reality of the situation.

Makala haya yanaeleza kwamba hukumu ya hakimu haiwezi kubatilishwa, wala na yeye mwenyewe wala na hakimu mwingine yeyote. Ushahidi kwamba hukumu ya hakimu haibatilishwi ni kwamba Maswahaba walikuwa na Ijmaa' juu yake. Abu Bakr (ra) alihukumu katika masuala kwa mujibu wa Ijtihad yake, na Umar (ra) alipingana naye lakini hakubatilisha hukumu zake, na Ali (ra) alipingana na Umar (ra) katika Ijtihad yake lakini hakubatilisha hukumu zake, na Ali (ra) alipingana na Abu Bakr (ra) na Umar (ra) wote wawili lakini hakubatilisha hukumu zao. Watu wa Najran walimwendea 'Ali (ra) wakasema: "Ewe kiongozi wa waumini, hukumu iko mikononi mwako na msamaha uko kwenye ulimi wako mwenyewe." Akasema: "Ole wenu, Umar aliongozwa vizuri, na sitabatilisha hukumu iliyotolewa na Umar." Imepokewa kwamba Umar (ra) alihukumu kwamba katika urithi wa pamoja, haki za ndugu wa upande wa baba zimefutwa. Kisha akaamuru wapewe sehemu, kisha akasema: "Hukumu ile inahusu kesi ile, na hukumu hii inahusu hii," akatekeleza hukumu zote mbili licha ya mkinzano uliopo. Jambo hili limetajwa na Ibn Qudamah katika Al-Mughni na Al-Bayhaqi kutoka kwa Al-Hakam bin Mas'ud Al-Thaqafi. Pia alihukumu kwa namna tofauti kuhusu babu (babu mzaa baba), wala hakubatilisha hata moja ya hukumu zilizotangulia, kama ilivyotajwa na Al-Bayhaqi katika Al-Sunan Al-Kubra.

This article explains that the ruling of a judge cannot be annulled, neither by himself nor by any other judge. The evidence that the ruling of the judge is not annulled is that the companions had an Ijma’ upon it. Abu Bakr (ra) ruled in the issues according to his Ijtihad, and Umar (ra) differed with him and did not annul his rulings, and Ali (ra) differed with Umar (ra) in his Ijtihad and did not annul his rulings, and Ali (ra) disagreed with both Abu Bakr (ra) and Umar (ra) and did not annul their rulings. The people of Najran came to ‘Ali (ra) and said “O leader of the believers, the judgement is in your hands and your pardon is with your own tongue”. He said: “Woe to you, Umar was rightly guided and I will not reverse a judgement pronounced by Umar.” It has been reported that Umar (ra) judged that in the shared inheritance, the rights of brothers from the father’s side are abrogated. He then ordered that they have a share, and then said “That sentence applies to that case and this sentence applies to this one”, and he executed both sentences despite the contradiction. This was mentioned by Ibn Qudamah in Al-Mughni and Al-Bayhaqi from Al-Hakam Bin Mas’ud Al-Thaqafi. He also judged differently in relation to the grandfather and he never reversed any of the earlier sentences, as is mentioned by Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra.

Kuhusu yaliyopokewa kuhusu Shurayh (kadhi) kuwa alihukumu katika kesi ya binamu wawili wa upande wa baba, ambapo mmoja wao alikuwa ndugu wa mama, kwamba mali ipewe ndugu huyo, jambo hili lilipelekwa kwa Ali (ra) ambaye alisema: "Mleteni kwangu." Alipofika, alimwambia: "Umeliona wapi hili katika Kitabu cha Allah?" Akasema: "Allah (SWT) anasema,"

As for what has been reported about Shurayh (the judge) having judged in the case of two paternal cousins, where one of them was one of the mother’s brothers, that the estate should go to the brother, this was referred to Ali (ra) who said “Bring him to me”. When he came he said to him “Where in the Book of Allah did you find this?" He said Allah (swt) says,

"Lakini jamaa wenye uhusiano wa damu wana haki zaidi [ya kurithi] katika hukumu ya Allah." (TMQ 8:75), basi 'Ali (ra) akamwambia: "Allah pia anasema."

“But those of [blood] relationship are more entitled [to inheritance] in the decree of Allah.” (TMQ 8:75), so ‘Ali (ra) said to him “Allah also says.

"Na ikiwa mtu mume au mwanamke hana wazazi wala watoto, lakini ana ndugu wa kiume au wa kike, basi kwa kila mmoja wao ni sudusi." (TMQ 4:12), kisha yeye akabadilisha hukumu yake kama inavyotajwa katika baadhi ya riwaya. Ibn Qudamah amelijibu hili katika Al-Mughni, katika sura ya uamuzi wa kimahakama, akisema: "Haijathibitishwa kwamba Ali alibadilisha hukumu yake, lakini hata kama ingethibitishwa, huenda Ali alikuwa na uhakika kwamba alipingana na maandishi ya Qur'ani katika aya aliyoitaja, na kwa hivyo akaifuta hukumu yake." Imethibitishwa kwamba masahaba walikuwa wakihukumu masuala kwa mujibu wa ijtihadi zao, na kwamba Khalifa alikuwa akitofautiana nao katika ijtihadi zao katika enzi za Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra) na Ali (ra), na hakuna hata mmoja wao aliyekuwa akibatilisha hukumu za mwenzake. Pia imethibitishwa kwamba Umar (ra) alitoa hukumu zinazopingana na kutofautiana katika masuala ya mtu mmoja, na alikuwa akitekeleza hukumu zote wala hakubadilisha hukumu ya kwanza kwa ya pili, ingawa zilikuwa zinapingana. Na imethibitishwa kwamba alisema kuhusu jambo hili: "Hukumu hiyo inatumika kwa kesi hiyo, na hukumu hii inatumika kwa kesi hii" (imetajwa na Ibn Qudamah katika Al-Mughni na Al-Bayhaqi kutoka kwa Al-Hakam b. Mas'ud Al-Thaqafi). Hii inaonyesha kutoweza kubadilishwa kwa hukumu za hakimu. Ibn Qudamah alisema katika Al-Mughni: "Kuhusu ikiwa ijtihadi yake ilibadilika bila kupingana na maandishi au ijma', au ikiwa ijtihadi yake ilitofautiana na ijtihadi ya wale waliomtangulia, hapaswi kuibadilisha kwa sababu tu ni tofauti, kwa kuwa masahaba wana ijma' juu ya hilo."

“And if a man or woman leaves neither ascendants nor descendants but has a brother or a sister, then for each one of them is a sixth.” (TMQ 4:12), and he then reversed his ruling as is mentioned in some narration. Ibn Qudamah replies to this in Al-Mughni in the chapter of the judiciary saying “It is not confirmed that Ali reversed his ruling, but if it was confirmed it may be that Ali was certain that he contradicted the text of the Quran in the verse which he mentioned and ,therefore, he voided his ruling”. It is confirmed that the companions used to rule in issues according to their Ijtihad and that the Khalifah used to differ with them in their Ijtihad in the eras of Abu Bakr (ra), Umar (ra) and ‘Ali (ra), and none of them would annul the rulings of the other. And it is confirmed that Umar (ra) ruled by opposite and different rulings in single issues, and would execute all of the rulings and not reverse the first ruling by the second one even though they were contradictory, and it is confirmed that he said regarding this “That sentence applies to that case and this sentence applies to this one” (mentioned by Ibn Qudamah in Al-Mughni and Al-Bayhaqi from Al-Hakam b. Mas’ud Al-Thaqafi). This indicates the irreversibility of the judge’s rulings. Ibn Qudamah said in Al-Mughni: “As for if his Ijtihad changed without contradicting a text or an Ijma’, or if his Ijtihad differed from the Ijtihad of those before him, he should not reverse it just because it is different, for the companions have an Ijma’ on that”.

Kuhusu yale yaliyosimuliwa kutoka kwenye barua ya Umar Bin Al-Khattab (ra) kwa Abu Musa, kutoka kwa maneno yake: “Usiruhusu hukumu uliyoitoa jana, ambayo ukaipitia tena na ukapata mwongozo sahihi, ikakuzuia kurudi kwenye ukweli, kwa kuwa ukweli ni wa kale (Qadim), na kurudi kwenye ukweli ni bora kuliko kuendelea na batili.” Hayo yamepokewa na Al-Bayhaqi katika Al-Sunan kutoka kwa Sa‘id Bin Abi Burdah, na Khatib Al-Baghdadi katika Al-Tarikh kutoka kwa Sa‘id Bin Abihi, na Al-Daraqutni kutoka kwa Abu ’l-Malih Al-Hathali. Yaliyokusudiwa katika barua hiyo ni kwamba, ukitoa hukumu jana kisha ukagundua kuwa si sahihi, usiruhusu hilo likuzuie kuibadilisha na kutoa hukumu nyingine katika kesi nyingine. Haimaanishi kwamba unapaswa kubatilisha hukumu ya jana. Ndiyo maana Umar (ra) alisema “kurudi kwenye ukweli” wala hakusema kubatilisha hukumu yako. Kurudi kwenye ukweli maana yake ni kuacha maoni yasiyo sahihi na kushikilia maoni sahihi. Kwa hiyo barua hiyo haitumiki kama ushahidi kwamba inaruhusiwa kubatilisha hukumu. Hii ndiyo sababu katika Uislamu hakuna kitu kinachoitwa utangulizi wa kisheria (judicial precedent). Yaani, hakuna nafasi ya kusema kwamba katika kesi kama hii hukumu itakuwa hivi na hivi. Ikiwa hukumu fulani ilitolewa kwa kesi fulani, hukumu hiyo haimlazimishi mtu mwingine kuhukumu kwa namna hiyo. Badala yake, inaruhusiwa kwa hakimu mwingine kutoa hukumu tofauti katika kesi inayofanana ikiwa anaona kwamba hukumu mpya ni sahihi zaidi. Kwa upande wa kesi yenyewe, hukumu ya Allah (swt) ingekuwa imetekelezwa juu yake, hivyo hakimu amekatazwa kubatilisha hukumu hiyo au kuibadilisha. Ndiyo maana katika Uislamu hakuna mahakama za rufaa wala mahakama za kassation. Kwa mtazamo wa mchakato, mahakama zinapaswa kuwa katika ngazi moja. Kanuni ya Shari‘ah inasema: “Ijtihad haibatilishwi na Ijtihad nyingine.” Hakuna Mujtahid anayeweza kuwa chanzo cha mamlaka kwa Mujtahid mwingine, na hivyo ingekuwa haramu kuwa na mahakama zinazobatilisha hukumu za mahakama nyingine.

As for what has been narrated from the message of Umar Bin Al-Khattab (ra) to Abu Musa from his words “Do not allow a judgement you passed yesterday, which you reviewed and gained the right guidance, to prevent you from returning to the truth, for the truth is Qadim (old), and to return to the truth is better than to continue with the falsehood” as reported by Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan from Sa‘id Bin Abi Burdah, and Khatib Al-Baghdadi in Al-Tarikh from Sa‘id Bin Abihi, and Al-Daraqutni from Abu ’l-Malih Al-Hathali, what was intended in the letter was if you passed a judgement yesterday and then realised that it was wrong, do not let this stop you from changing it and passing a different judgement in another case. It does not mean that you should annul yesterday’s judgement. That is why Umar (ra) said “to return to the truth” and he did not say to reverse your judgement. To return to the truth means to abandon the wrong opinion and adopt the right one. Therefore, the letter does not serve as evidence that it is permissible to annul a judgement. This is why in Islam there is nothing called judicial precedent. In other words, there is no place to say that in such and such a case the judgement would be so and so. If a certain verdict was passed on a particular case, that verdict does not oblige anyone else to judge accordingly. It is rather permitted to pass a different judgement on a similar case by a different judge if he thinks that the new ruling is more correct. As for the case itself, the rule of Allah (swt) would have been applied to it, ,therefore, the judge would be forbidden from annulling that rule or changing it. This is why there are no courts of appeal in Islam, and nor there is any court of cassation. The judiciary, from the point of view of process, should be of the same level. The Shari'ah principle states: “Ijtihad is not annulled by another Ijtihad.” So no Mujtahid could serve as an authoritative source for another Mujtahid, and thus it would be forbidden to have courts that annul the judgements of other courts.

Hata hivyo, ikiwa hakimu hakuhukumu kwa kanuni za Sharia ya Kiislamu, akahukumu kwa Kufr, au kwa jambo linalopingana na maandiko yaliyo wazi kutoka Qur'ani, Sunnah au Ijma' ya Maswahaba, au jambo linalopingana na hali halisi ya mambo, kama kutoa hukumu ya Qisas kutokana na mtu kuuawa, kisha muuaji halisi akajulikana, basi katika hali hizi na zinazofanana nazo hukumu ya hakimu inabatilika. Hii ni kwa sababu ya maneno ya Mtume wa Allah ﷺ.

However if the judge did not rule by the Islamic Shari’ah rules, and ruled by Kufr, or by what contradicts a definite text from the Quran, Sunnah or Ijma’ of the companions, or what contradicts the reality of the situation, such as giving a ruling of Qisas as a result of killing someone, and then the real killer became apparent, then in these situations and similar the rule of the judge is nullified. This is due to the words of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh).

. » مَنْ أَحْدَثَ فِي أَمْرِنَا هَذَا مَا لَيْسَ فِيهِ فَ هُوَ رَد « .

. » مَنْ أَحْدَثَ فِي أَمْرِنَا هَذَا مَا لَيْسَ فِيهِ فَ هُوَ رَد « .

"Yeyote atakayeanzisha katika jambo hili (Uislamu) letu kitu ambacho si sehemu yake, basi kitakataliwa" (imepokewa na Al-Bukhari na Muslim kutoka kwa Aisha(ra)). Na imepokewa na Abu Dawud kutoka kwa Jabir.

“Whoever introduces into this matter (Islam) of ours something which does not belong to it, then it is rejected” (reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim from Aishah(ra)). And it is reported by Abu Dawud from Jabir.

. فَجُلِدَ الْحَدَّ، ثُمَّ أُخْبِرَ أَنَّهُ مُحْصَنٌ أَنَّ رَجُلاً زَنَى بِامْرَأَةٍ، فَأَمَرَ بِهِ النَّبِيُّ « » فَأَمَرَ بِهِ فَ رُجِمَ .

. فَجُلِدَ الْحَدَّ، ثُمَّ أُخْبِرَ أَنَّهُ مُحْصَنٌ أَنَّ رَجُلاً زَنَى بِامْرَأَةٍ، فَأَمَرَ بِهِ النَّبِيُّ « » فَأَمَرَ بِهِ فَ رُجِمَ .

"Mwanaume mmoja alizini na mwanamke, basi Mtume ﷺ akaamuru apigwe bakora, kisha akaambiwa kuwa alikuwa ameoa, hivyo akaamuru mwanaume huyo apigwe mawe." Na Malik bin Anas alisimulia katika Al-Muwatta.

“A man committed fornication with a woman, so the Messenger (pbuh) commanded that he be lashed, then he was told that he was married, and so he commanded that the man be stoned.” and Malik Bin Anas reported in Al-Muwatta.

Mwanamke mmoja aliyejifungua mtoto wa miezi sita alipelekwa kwa 'Uthman Bin 'Affan, naye akaamuru apigwe mawe mpaka afe. Ali akamwambia: Yeye hastahili hilo, kwani Allah amesema katika Kitabu Chake: "Na mimba yake na kunyonyesha kwake ni miezi thelathini." (TMQ 46:15) na amesema "Mama wananyonyesha watoto wao miaka miwili kamili kwa yule anayetaka kutimiza kunyonyesha." (TMQ 2:233) maana yake ni kwamba mimba inaweza kuwa miezi sita, na hivyo yeye hapaswi kupigwa mawe. 'Uthman alituma watu wamtafute, lakini akakuta tayari alikwisha pigwa mawe. Na 'Abd Al-Razzaq amesimulia kutoka kwa Imamu Al-Thawri kwamba: "Ikiwa hakimu atatoa hukumu kinyume na Kitabu cha Allah, au Sunnah ya Mtume wa Allah ﷺ, au jambo lililokubaliwa kwa pamoja, basi hakimu atakayekuja baada yake aitangue hukumu hiyo."

“A woman who gave birth to a six-month baby was brought to ‘Uthman Bin ‘Affan and he ordered that she be stoned. Ali said to him: she does not deserve that since Allah said in His Book: “And his gestation and weaning [period] is thirty months.” (TMQ 46:15) and He said “Mothers may breastfeed their children two complete years for whoever wishes to complete the nursing [period].” (TMQ 2:233) which means that the pregnancy can be six months, and so she is not to be stoned. ‘Uthman sent for her, but found that she had already been stoned.” And ‘Abd Al-Razzaq reported from Imam Al-Thawri “if a judge ruled in contradiction to the Book of Allah, or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) , or something agreed upon, then the judge after him should nullify it”.

Yule mwenye mamlaka ya kubatilisha hukumu hizi ni hakimu wa Madhalim.

The one who has the power to nullify these rulings is the judge of the Madhalim.