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. .

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..

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: .

“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. .

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

“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: .

"If two disputing parties sat before you"..

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: .

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: .

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

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

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. .

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 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." .

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. .

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. .

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. .

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

“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. .

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: .

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

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

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”. .

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