Haijaruhusiwa kwa mahakama kuundwa na zaidi ya hakimu mmoja mwenye mamlaka ya kutoa hukumu; lakini inaruhusiwa kwa hakimu mmoja au zaidi kuwepo pamoja naye, ila hawana haki ya kuhukumu, bali wanaweza tu kushauriwa au kutoa maoni, na maoni yao hayatakuwa ya lazima.

It is not allowed for a tribunal to be formed of more than one judge that has the power to render judgement; it is however permitted for one or more judges to be present with him but they would not have the right to judge, but merely to be consulted or to voice an opinion, and their opinion would not be binding. .

Hii ni kwa sababu Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ hakuwahi kuteua majaji wawili kushughulikia jambo moja, bali aliteua jaji mmoja kwa kila jambo. Zaidi ya hayo, mahakama ni kufikisha hukmu ya Shariah kwa njia ya utekelezaji, na hukmu ya Shariah inayomhusu Muislamu mmoja haiwezi kubadilika, kwa kuwa ni hukmu ya Allah, na hukmu ya Allah ni moja. Ni kweli kwamba ufafanuzi wake unaweza kutofautiana, lakini kuhusu Muislamu kwa upande wa vitendo inabaki kuwa moja na haibadiliki kamwe. Jaji anapofikisha hukmu ya Allah katika jambo lililopo kwa njia ya utekelezaji, ufikishaji huu lazima uwe mmoja, kwa kuwa ni kufikisha hukmu ya Allah kwa njia ya kulazimisha. Hivyo ni kutenda kwa hukmu ya Allah, na hukmu ya Allah kwa mtazamo wa vitendo haibadiliki, hata kama uelewa wake unatofautiana. Kwa hiyo, ni haramu kuwa na jaji zaidi ya mmoja kwa kesi moja, yaani katika mahakama moja. Kuhusu nchi, inaruhusiwa kuwa na mahakama mbili tofauti zinazoshughulikia kesi za aina zote katika eneo moja, kwa kuwa mamlaka ya mahakama yamekabidhiwa na Khalifah, hivyo ni kama ubalozi ambapo wingi unaruhusiwa, basi itaruhusiwa kuwa na majaji kadhaa katika eneo moja. Iwapo wahusika wa mgogoro wasingeweza kukubaliana juu ya mahakama gani wapeleke kesi yao au jaji gani aichunguze kesi yao, uchaguzi wa mlalamikaji ungepewa uzito zaidi kuliko ule wa mshtakiwa, na kesi ingepewa jaji wa uchaguzi wake, kwa kuwa anatafuta haki yake, na hili lina uzito zaidi kuliko la mshtakiwa.

This is because the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) never appointed two judges to deal with one matter, rather He (PBUH) appointed one judge for each matter. Besides, the judiciary is the conveying of the Shariah rule by way of enforcement, and the Shariah rule concerning the one Muslim cannot vary, for it is the rule of Allah, and the rule of Allah is one. It is true that its interpretation may vary, but concerning the Muslim from the practical side it remains one and it never varies. When the judge conveys the rule of Allah in the matter at hand by way of enforcement, this conveyance must be one, for it is the conveying of the rule of Allah by way of compulsion. Thus it would be acting upon the rule of Allah, and the rule of Allah from a practical point of view does not vary, even if the understanding does vary. Therefore, it is forbidden to have more than one judge for the same case, i.e. in the same court. As for the country, it is permitted to have two separate courts dealing in all types of cases in one area, because the judiciary is delegated by the Khalifah, so it is like the deputyship where plurality is permitted, thus it would be permitted to have several judges in one area. If the disputing parties could not agree on which tribunal they should take their case to or which judge should look into their case, the choice of the plaintiff would outweigh that of the defendant and the case would be given to the judge of his choice, as he would be seeking his right and this outweighs the defendant..

Hakimu anaweza kutoa hukumu tu katika mahakama ya kisheria; na ushahidi pamoja na kiapo vinaweza kuzingatiwa tu katika mahakama ya kisheria. Hii ni kwa sababu imepokewa kwa mnyororo wa wapokezi kutoka kwa Abdullah Ibn al-Zubayr aliyesema:

The judge can only rule in a judicial court; and the evidence and the oath can only be considered in the judicial court. This is because it has been reported on the authority of Abdullah Ibn al-Zubayr who said: .

"Mtume wa Allah ﷺ ameamuru kwamba pande mbili zinazozozana ziketi mbele ya hakimu." Hadith hii imesimuliwa na Abu Dawud [Sunan, #3588], na inaonyesha namna ambavyo mchakato wa kimahakama unapaswa kuendeshwa. Ni namna halali yenyewe, yaani lazima kuwe na namna maalum ambayo mchakato wa kimahakama unapaswa kuendeshwa, nayo ni pande mbili zinazozozana kuketi mbele ya hakimu, na hii ingekuwa mahakama ya kimahakama. Kwa hiyo hili ni sharti la uhalali wa utaratibu wa kimahakama, yaani kwamba kunapaswa kuwepo mahali maalum ambapo hukumu itatolewa ili ichukuliwe kuwa hukumu halali, na hili ni pande mbili zinazozozana kuketi mbele ya hakimu.

“The Messenger of Allah has ordered that the two disputing parties should sit before the judge.” This hadith is narrated by Abu Dawud [Sunan, #3588], and it demonstrates the form in which the judicial process should be conducted, and it is a lawful form in itself, i.e. there must be a specific form in which the judicial process is to be conducted, which is for the two disputing parties to sit before the judge, and this would be the judicial court. Therefore this is a condition for the validity of the judicial procedure, i.e. that there ought to be a special place where the judgement is to be conducted for it to qualify as a legitimate judgement, and this would be for the two disputing parties to sit before a judge. .

Hili linaungwa mkono na hadithi ya ‘Ali (ra) wakati Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alipomwambia:

This is supported by the hadith of ‘Ali (ra) when the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said to him: .

"Ewe 'Ali, ikiwa wapinzani wawili wangekaa mbele yako, usitoe hukumu kwa upande wowote mpaka usikie kile ambacho upande mwingine unasema, kama vile ulivyosikia la kwanza." Pia inaonyesha namna maalum ambayo yeye ﷺ alisema:

“O ’Ali, if two disputing parties sat before you, do not judge (in favour) for either of them until you hear what the other party has to say as you have heard the first one.” It also indicates a special form where He (PBUH) said: .

"Ikiwa wahusika wawili wanaobishana wangeketi mbele yako"..

"If two disputing parties sat before you"..

Kwa hiyo mahakama ya kisheria ni lazima ili hukumu iwe sahihi, na pia ni lazima ili kiapo kizingatiwe, kwa kuwa Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema:

Therefore the judicial court is a must if the judgement is to be valid, and is also a must for the oath to be considered, for the Messenger of Allah ( PBUH) said: .

"Kiapo lazima kitolewe na mshtakiwa," kama alivyosimulia Al-Bukhari kwa mamlaka ya Ibn Abbas [Sahih, #2668]. Hatachukuliwa kuwa mshtakiwa isipokuwa katika mahakama ya kisheria. Vivyo hivyo kwa ushahidi, hauwezi kuzingatiwa isipokuwa mbele ya mahakama ya kisheria, kwa kuwa Mjumbe wa Allah ﷺ alisema: .

The oath must be given by the defendant,” as narrated by Al-Bukhari on the authority of Ibn Abbas [Sahih, #2668]. He would not be considered as a defendant except in a judicial court. The same applies for the evidence, it cannot be considered except before a judicial court, for the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: .

"Mlalamikaji ndiye anayepaswa kutoa ushahidi, na kiapo kinawajibika kwa yule anayepinga." Imepokewa na Al-Bayhaqi.

"It is the plaintiff who should provide the evidence, and the oath is obliged on the one that contests." As narrated by Al-Bayhaqi. .

Zaidi ya hayo, hawezi kuchukuliwa kuwa mlalamikaji isipokuwa mbele ya mahakama ya kisheria.

Additionally he cannot be considered a plaintiff except before a judicial court. .

Inaruhusiwa kuwa na ngazi mbalimbali za mahakama kulingana na aina ya kesi. Hivyo, inaruhusiwa baadhi ya majaji kuwekewa mipaka ya kushughulikia kesi maalum kwa kiwango fulani, na kupeleka kesi nyingine kwa mahakama nyingine.

It is permitted to have various levels of court according to the type of cases. Thus it would be permitted to have some judges confined to dealing with specific cases to a certain extent, and to refer other cases to other courts. .

Hii ni kwa sababu, uamuzi (al-qadhaa) ni uwakilishi unaotolewa na Khalifah, na ni kama uwakilishi mwingine wowote, bila tofauti yoyote. Kwa kweli, uamuzi ni aina moja ya uwakilishi, ambao unaweza kuwa wa jumla na pia unaweza kuwa wa mambo maalum. Kwa hiyo, inaruhusiwa kumteua jaji kushughulikia kesi maalum tu, na katika hali hiyo hataruhusiwa kushughulikia kesi nyingine zisizo zile zilizobainishwa. Pia inaruhusiwa kumteua jaji mwingine kuchunguza kesi za aina zote, zikiwemo zile zilizotajwa, hata katika mahali pamoja, au kuchunguza kesi nyingine zisizo zile zilizotajwa. Kwa hiyo, inaruhusiwa kuwa na ngazi mbalimbali za mahakama, na Waislamu walikuwa nazo hapo zamani.

This is because, the judiciary is a delegated by the Khalifah and it is just like the deputyship, with no difference at all. In fact, the judiciary is one form of deputyship, which can be general and can also be specific. Therefore, it would be permitted to have a judge appointed to deal in specific cases only, in which case he would not be allowed to deal with other than those cases specified. It is also permitted to appoint another judge to look into all sorts of cases including those mentioned, even in the same location, or to look into cases other than those mentioned. Therefore it is permitted to have various levels of tribunal, and Muslims had this in the past. .

Al-Mawardi aliandika katika kitabu chake kiitwacho Al Ahkam Al Sultaniyya: "Abu Abdullah Al-Zubayr alisema: Kwa muda fulani, Maamiri hapa Basra walikuwa wakimteua qadhi katika msikiti mkuu (Al-Masjid Al-Jami'), wakimwita qadhi wa msikiti. Alikuwa akihukumu katika mizozo inayohusu kiasi kisichozidi dinari ishirini na dirham mia mbili, na alikuwa akilazimisha malipo ya matunzo. Hakuwa akivuka mahali alipopangiwa wala mipaka aliyopewa."

Al-Mawardi wrote in his book entitled Al Ahkam Al Sultaniyya: "Abu Abdullah Al-Zubayr said: For some time, the Amirs here in Basra used to appoint a judge at the central mosque (Al-Masjid Al-Jami'), they called him the judge of the mosque. He used to judge in disputes involving sums not exceeding twenty Dinars and two hundred Dirhams, and he used to impose the maintenances. He would not go beyond the place assigned to him and the limits given to him." .

Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alimteua wengine kumwakilisha katika mambo ya mahakama; alimteua Amr Ibnul Aas kuchunguza kesi moja, na alimteua Ali Ibnu Abi Talib kuwa msimamizi wa mahakama huko Yemen akiwa na mamlaka ya kuchunguza kesi yoyote. Hii inaonyesha kwamba inaruhusiwa kuwa na mahakama maalum na mahakama ya jumla.

The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) delegated others on his behalf in the judiciary; he appointed Amr Ibnul Aas to look into one case, and he appointed Ali Ibnu Abi Talib over the judiciary in Yemen with powers to look into any case. This indicates that it is permitted to have a specific and general judiciary. .

Hakuna mahakama za rufaa wala mahakama za kubatilisha hukumu, kwa hiyo mfumo wa kushughulikia kesi ni mmoja tu. Hakimu akitoa hukumu, hukumu hiyo inakuwa ya lazima, na hukumu ya hakimu mwingine haiwezi kuibatilisha kwa namna yoyote. Kanuni ya kisheria inasema: "Ijtihadi haibatilishwi na ijtihadi nyingine kama hiyo." Kwa hiyo, mujtahid mmoja hana mamlaka ya kumzuia mujtahid mwingine; hivyo si sahihi kuwa na mahakama zinazobatilisha hukumu za mahakama nyingine.

There are no courts of appeal and there are no courts of cessation, so the judiciary, as far as the method by which the cases are treated, is one and the same. If the judge pronounced a sentence, it would become binding, and the sentence of another judge would not under any circumstances reverse it. The divine principle states: "ijtihad is not annulled by similar ijtihad." So, a mujtahid is not proof against another mujtahid; so it is invalid to have courts that nullify the verdicts of other courts. .

Hata hivyo, ikiwa hakimu ataacha kuhukumu kwa mujibu wa Shariah na akahukumu kwa kanuni ya kukufuru, au akahukumu kwa kanuni inayopingana na dalili ya Shariah kutoka Kitabu, Sunnah, au Ijmaa ya Maswahaba, au akatoa hukumu inayopingana na uhalisia, kama vile kumhukumu mtu kuwa muuaji wa makusudi kisha muuaji halisi akajitokeza, katika hali kama hizo hukumu ya hakimu hubatilishwa.

However, if the judge abandons ruling by the Shariah and judged according to a rule of disbelief, or if he judged by a rule that contradicts a Shariah text from the Book, Sunnah or the Ijmaa of the Sahabah, or he issued a verdict that contradicts with the reality, such as if he judged on somebody as a deliberate killer, then the real killer appeared. In such cases, the verdict of the judge is reversed. .

Hii ni kwa sababu Mtume wa Allah ﷺ alisema:

This is because the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: .

"Yeyote atakayebuni jambo katika dini yetu ambalo si sehemu yake, basi litakataliwa," kama alivyopokea Al-Bukhari [Sahih, #2697] na Muslim [Sahih, #1798] kwa mapokezi ya ‘A’ishah.

“Anyone who invented something in our matter (deen) that which is not from it, it would be rejected”, as narrated by Al-Bukhari [Sahih, #2697] and Muslim [Sahih, #1798] on the authority of ‘A’ishah. .

Pia Jabir bin Abdullah amesimulia: "Mtu mmoja alizini na mwanamke, basi Mtume ﷺ akaamuru apigwe mijeledi. Baadaye akaarifiwa kuwa alikuwa ameoa, basi akaamuru apigwe mawe." Malik bin Anas pia amesimulia, kwamba alisema: "Nilipata habari kuhusu Uthman (ra), kwamba mwanamke mmoja alipelekwa kwake, akajifungua baada ya miezi sita, basi akaamuru apigwe mawe. Ali (ra) akamwambia: 'Haifai kupigwa mawe, kwa sababu Allah (S.W.T) anasema: .

It is also narrated by Jabir b. Abdullah: “That a man committed adultery with a woman, so the Prophet PBUH) ordered that he be lashed. Later on he was informed that he was married, so he ordered that he be stoned”. Malik b. Anas also narrated, that he said: “I got knowledge about ‘Uthman (ra), that a women was brought to him where she gave delivery after six months so he ordered her to be stoned, Ali (ra) said to him: ‘It is not valid to be stoned, because Allah (S.W.T) says: .

Kubebwa kwa (mtoto) hadi kuachishwa kwake ni kipindi cha miezi thelathini” [46:15] Na Yeye (SWT) anasema: .

The carrying of the (child) to his weaning is period of thirty months” [46:15] And He (PBUH) says: .

"Mama atawanyonyesha watoto wao miaka miwili kamili, kwa yule anayetaka kutimiza muda huo." [2:233].

“The mother shall give suckle to their children for two whole years, for them who desire to complete the term.” [2:233].

Kwa hiyo, kipindi cha ujauzito ni miezi sita, kwa hivyo asipigwe mawe.' Kwa msingi huo 'Uthman (ra) aliamuru arejeshwe, lakini akakuta kwamba tayari alikuwa amepigwa mawe. 'Abd al-Razzaq alisimulia kutoka kwa Al-Imam Al-Thawri kwamba alisema: "Ikiwa hakimu alitoa hukumu kinyume na Kitabu cha Allah au Sunnah ya Mtume ﷺ, au chochote ambacho kuna Ijmaa juu yake, basi hakimu mwingine baada yake anaweza kuibatilisha."

Thus, the pregnancy period is six months, so she should not be stoned.’ Accordingly ‘Uthman (ra) ordered that she be returned back, but he found that she had already been stoned.” ‘Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Al-Imam Al-Thawri that he said “If a judge gave a verdict opposite to the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the Messenger (PBUH) or anything where there is an Ijmaa over it, then another judge after him may reverse it”. .

Hata hivyo, jukumu la kubatilisha hukumu hizi ni la Qadhi wa Mazalim.

However, the responsibility of reversing these verdicts is to the Judge of Mazalim.