The Types of Judges :
The judiciary in Islam defines the role of three types of qadi’s, which are :
1) Qadi ‘Aam : He is the qadi that settles the disputes between the people. He deals with both civil and criminal cases.
2) Qadi Muhtasib : He is in charge of looking into and settling any breach of law that may endanger the public interest or property.
3) Qadi Madhaalim : He deals with disputes between the people and the State.
The Qadi ‘Aam
As for the evidence about the judiciary that settles the disputes that occur between people, this is derived from the actions of the Messenger of Allah (saw), and in his appointment of Mu‘adh ibn Jabal over an area of Yemen.
The Mandatory powers of the Qadi ‘Aam
All the cases have to be judged in court sessions where the evidence is presented to the qadi. Since sovereignty belongs to Allah (swt), there is no concept of jury. The evidence is presented to the judge who then judges on the basis of Qur’an and Sunnah. It is forbidden to have more than one judge presiding over the case and having the power to render judgement. However it is permitted for other judges to be present with him. Their role would merely be to counsel or voice an opinion, but their opinions would not be binding. This is so because the Messenger of Allah (saw) never appointed two judges to deal with one matter, but only one judge for one matter, which indicates that it is forbidden to have two or more judges to look into one matter.
The judge can only rule in a judicial court and any evidences or oaths can only be considered in the judicial court. This is so because it has been reported on the authority of ‘Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr who said, “The Messenger of Allah has ordered that the two disputing parties should sit before the judge.” This hadith demonstrates the form in which the judiciary should be conducted : The two disputing parties should sit together before a judge, and this would be in a judicial court.
It is permitted to have various levels of court according to the type of case. 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.
This is so because the judiciary is a delegation from the Khaleefah and it is just like the deputyship. In fact the judiciary is a form of deputyship which can be general, where the judge would have authority to consider a wide variety of matters; or it can be specific, with the judge specialising in only a few matters. Therefore, it is permitted to have various levels of tribunal as Muslims had in the past : Al-Mawardi wrote in his book entitled al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya:
“Abu ‘Abdullah al Zubayr said: For a while, 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 that do not exceed twenty dinars and two hundred dirhams, and he used to impose the maintenances. He would not exceed his boundaries nor the duties entrusted to him.”
Different areas of authority of the Qadi ‘Aam
There are ten areas where the jurisdiction of the Qadi ‘Aam may apply. These are:
- Judge of disputes between people, e.g. over ownership of property (Munaza‘at).
- Judge of Rights (Huquq).
- Judge of guardianship, e.g. over the orphan, the child who is not mature, the child’s money etc. (Wilayah)
- Judge of trusts e.g. goods given up for use by people for the sake of Allah like mosques, fields etc. (Awqaf)
- Judge of implementation of the will, i.e. inheritance (Tanfeedh al-wasiya).
- Judge who is waliy amr (guardian) of people who do not have waliy amr, e.g. single women who want to marry etc. (Tazweej al-ayama)
- Judge for establishing hadud punishments (‘Iqamat il hadud).
- Judge for looking after the interests of the people, i.e. public interest like if the people were to dispute about building a railway in the area etc. (An nazar fi masalih al-nass)
- Judge who looks into the character of the witnesses - he has a special court, which verifies the eligibility of the witnesses (Tasaffahi shuhud).
- Judge to solve disputes between the weak and the strong (Taswia fil hukmi bain al-quwi wal-daeef).
There is also a special type of judge who looks into the domestic disputes, i.e. between the husband and wife.
The Judge’s decision is Final
There are no appeal courts and there is no court 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 never and under no circumstances reverse it. The sentence of the judge cannot be reversed except by him personally and no other judge could do this. The evidence for this is derived from the general consensus of the Sahabah, for Abu Bakr judged in some cases according to his own ijtihad while ‘Umar did not agree with him, and he did not reverse his judgements; ‘Ali disagreed with ‘Umar’s ijtihad but did not reverse his sentences; ‘Ali differed with Abu Bakr and ‘Umar but their sentencing was never reversed. The people of Najran came to ‘Ali and said to him: “O Amir of the believers, your book is in your own 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. “
This is why there are no courts of appeal in Islam, nor are there courts of cessation. The judiciary from the adjudication point of view should be of the same level. The Shari‘ah principle states : “The ijtihad does not reverse another ijtihad.” So no mujtahid (scholar) could serve as an authoritative source for another mujtahid; thus it would be forbidden to have tribunals that reverse the sentences of other tribunals.
However, if the judge abandons the rule by the Shari‘ah, and judges by a rule of disbelief, his judgement would be false, and also if he judged by a rule that contradicts the Shari‘ah (i.e. if he did not have an evidence or even a doubtful evidence), and there were texts that contradicted him, then the judgement of the ruler or the judge should be rejected for the Messenger of Allah (saw) said, “Anything that is not derived from our teaching is a reject.” And the one who has the power to reject it would be the judge of the madhaalim (see later).
The Qadi Muhtasib (or Qadi Hisba)
The function of this judge is related to conveying the Shari‘ah rule by way of compulsion in whatever may harm the common interest. This type of institution is also known as the hisba, and it carries out a specific task within the Islamic State, which is the controlling of the traders and skilled workers lest they cheat in their trade, work or in their products, lest they wrongly use the weights and measures or any other type of action that may affect the public rights.
As for the evidence of this judiciary, this is highlighted in the hadith of the heap of food : It has been reported in Sahih Muslim on the authority of Abu Hurayrah the following: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) passed by a heap of food, as he put his hand inside it his fingers got wet, so he said to the vendor: What is this? He said : It was dampened by the rain O Messenger of Allah. He (saw) said : Why don’t you put it on the top so that people can see it? He who cheats us is not one of us.”
So this was a public right on which the Messenger of Allah looked into, and judged that the wet food should be displayed at the top to prevent cheating. And this applies to all the common rights or interests that are of this nature. It does not include the penal code or the criminal law, for they are not of the same sort, as they are disputes between people in the first place.
The Mandatory powers of the Muhtasib
The muhtasib has the power to judge on the offence as soon as he learns about it, and this could take place on the spot and in any place; he does not need to be in a judiciary court. He will have at his disposal a number of police officers to execute his orders and apply the sentence on the spot. A judiciary court would not be required for the muhtasib to look into the case at hand as he passes the judgement the moment he is sure that it took place, and he has the power to judge in any place and at any time, be it in the market, in the house, or while riding in the car both day or night.
This is so because the evidence that confirms the need to have a judiciary court in order to deal with a case does not apply to the muhtasib, for the hadith which confirmed such condition states: ‘If the two disputing parties sat before you’, and this is not applicable to the judge of hisba, for there is no plaintiff and no defendant, there is only a public concern that has been violated, or a violation of the Shari‘ah. Besides, when the Messenger of Allah (saw) looked into the case of the heap of food, he was at the time walking in the market and the food was displayed for sale, he (saw) did not summon the vendor to him, but as soon as he detected the offence he dealt with it on the spot. This indicates that the cases of hisba do not require a judiciary court.
The muhtasib can be given the right to select deputies in lieu of him. They should fulfil the requirements of the muhtasib, and he is allowed to assign them to different places. These deputies would have the power to carry out the duties of the hisba in the areas they have been assigned to and in the cases they have been delegated for. These deputies must be appointed as full judges, holding all the mandatory powers given to a judge.
The legal requirements for those whom the judge appoints as his deputies are: They must be Muslims, sane, free, just, mature and faqihs (learned scholars) in the matters they are assigned to deal with, i.e. they must have the same requirements of the muhtasib for they are also judges like him.
The Qadi Madhaalim
The judge of madhaalim is a judge appointed to lift every madhlama (unjust act) perpetrated by the State against any person, whether this person were a citizen of the State or a person living under its authority, and whether this madhlama were perpetrated by the Khaleefah or those working under him be they rulers or civil servants.
This is the definition of the judge of madhaalim and the origin of the judiciary of madhaalim is derived from reports attributed to the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he described the unjust acts perpetrated by the ruler while ruling over the subjects as being a madhlama. Anas reported: “Prices soared during the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw) so they said to him: O Messenger of Allah why don’t you introduce pricing? He said: Verily Allah is the Recipient, the Extender of wealth , the Provider, and the Pricer, and I hope that I will meet Allah (swt) without having anyone accusing me of having perpetrated a madhlama against him be it in blood or in money.” He (saw) therefore judged the pricing as being a madhlama, for if he had done it, i.e. introduced pricing, he would have acted without authority.
The madhaalim (unjust acts) were mentioned in the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw) where he said: “If I took money from someone, here is my money, let him take from it, and if I whipped the back of someone, here is my back, let him retaliate.” This indicates that complaints against the ruler, or the wali or the civil servant should be submitted to the judge of madhaalim, and the Judge of madhaalim would convey the Shari‘ah rule by way of compulsion.
He (saw) also made the issues that affect the common rights which the State organises for the people as part of the madhaalim, such as the irrigation of farming lands by common water in turn; the Messenger of Allah (saw) looked into the dispute over irrigation that took place between al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam and a man of the Ansar; he (saw) witnessed it personally and said to Al-Zubayr: “You irrigate first O Zubayr and then the Ansari.” Therefore, any madhlama that occurs on any person, whether perpetrated by the ruler, or occurring as a result of the State’s organisation or orders, would be considered as a madhlama, as gathered from the two ahadith. The matter would be then referred to the Khaleefah to deal with it or to whoever the Khaleefah appoints as judge of madhaalim to deal with such matters in lieu of him.
The Mandatory powers of the Judge of Madhaalim
Accounting the Rulers:
The judge of madhaalim has the mandatory powers to remove any ruler or civil servant, and he also has the right to remove the Khaleefah. The judge of madhaalim has the right to remove the rulers, for the ruler is appointed by a contract, known as the appointment contract (bay‘ah al-in‘iqad). It is important to understand that the court of madhaalim does not act on behalf of the Khaleefah, but is an independent court that is there to remove any madhlama implemented by the State on any of its citizens. So if a madhlama occurred in the wilayah of a certain governor, the court has the right to remove that madhlama it may have to remove that governor from office, even if the Khaleefah does not agree with the judgement.
As for its powers to remove the Khaleefah, this would also be a judgement aimed at removing a madhlama, for if a situation arose that necessitated his removal, or a situation as a result of which he should be removed, then his stay in office would be a madhlama, and it is the court of madhaalim that judges the removal of a madhlama, so it orders his removal. Therefore, the judgement of the court of madhaalim to remove the Khaleefah would be a judgement aimed at removing a madhlama. This is a principle mechanism that Islam has defined for regulating and accounting the ruler.
The court of madhaalim has the powers to look into any madhlama, whether the madhlama were perpetrated by government employees, or related to the contradiction of the Shari‘ah by the Khaleefah, or the various Shari‘ah rules adopted by the Khaleefah, or related to the imposing of a tax or any other matter. This is so because the Messenger of Allah (saw) refused to fix the prices when the Sahabah requested him to do so after the prices had soared, and he (saw) considered price fixing as being a madhlama. This proves if the action of the ruler contradicted or violated the Shari‘ah rules, it would be considered a madhlama. The Messenger of Allah (saw) was a ruler over the Muslims and their head of state.
Furthermore, every action that is part of the government business, performed by any member of the government, if this action was in contradiction of what is lawful, or if it violated the Shari‘ah rules, it would be considered a madhlama, for that person would be a deputy to the Khaleefah, acting on his behalf according to the task assigned to him within the ruling system. Therefore, the hadith about the pricing indicates that the offence committed by the Khaleefah is a madhlama.
To look into a text from the constitution or the canon, would be to look into the order of the authorities, since the constitution and the canon represent the basic laws and since the laws represent the order of the Khaleefah, this is also included in the hadith about the pricing, for it would be like looking into the Khaleefah’s actions; and besides, Allah (swt) says,
“If you dispute about something refer it to Allah and the Messenger.” [TMQ 4:59]
i.e. if you disputed with the people in authority about a matter, and this dispute was about an article in the constitution or an article of the law, then it would be a dispute between the subjects and those in authority about a rule of Shari‘ah, then it must be referred to Allah and His Messenger, which means in this case to refer it to the court of madhaalim, i.e. to the judgement of Allah (swt) and His Messenger (saw).
As for the mandatory powers given to the judge of madhaalim to look into the imposing of a tax, this is derived from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw) where he said, “If I took money from anyone, here is my money, let him take from it.” And he (saw) also said: “And I hope to meet Allah Azza wa Jall without having anyone claiming a madhlama against me, whether in blood or money.” If the Khaleefah took money from the subjects unlawfully, it would be a madhlama, therefore the court of madhaalim has the right to investigate tax affairs for it is money taken from the subjects. Its investigation of tax collections would be with the aim of ruling whether those taxes are lawfully imposed by Shari‘ah on the Muslims, such as the money taken to feed the needy, which would not be a madhlama; or with the aim of ruling whether those taxes are not imposed by the Shari‘ah, such as the monies taken to build a dam that is not considered to be essential which would therefore be a madhlama and would have to be removed. This is why the court of justice has the power to look into the taxes.
In the judiciary of madhaalim, the court sitting is optional, and the summons of the defendant is not necessary, nor is the presence of a plaintiff; the court of madhaalim has the right to look into a madhlama even if nobody filed a claim.
This is so because the evidence that confirms the need for a judiciary court to look into a case does not apply for the court of madhaalim for it is not always necessary to have a plaintiff. The court of madhaalim looks into the madhlama even if nobody filed a claim, and because it is not always necessary to summon the defendant, for it concentrates on the madhlama; therefore the necessity of a judiciary court, which is deduced from the ahadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw): “The two disputing parties sit before the judge.” and: “If the two disputing parties sat before you.”, does not apply to the court of madhaalim. Therefore, the court of madhaalim reserves the right to look into the madhlama as it occurs without any restrictions such as time, place or court sitting.