What is the ruling regarding liability if a wall, which could have been demolished, leans toward a public area and the owner is explicitly demanded to demolish it but refuses?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Blood-Money (Diyyāt)
Primary text
If the owner is demanded to demolish the leaning wall and refuses, the scholars of our school state that liability is incurred. Ahmad indicated assent to this view, which is also the doctrine of Malik, and similar views were held by Al-Hasan, Al-Nakha'i, and Al-Thawri. Abu Hanifa considers it preferable to assign liability because the right of passage belongs to all Muslims, and the leaning wall obstructs this right, giving them grounds to demand its removal; failure to remove it warrants liability, akin to placing an object on the wall that causes damage after being asked to remove it.
Supporting text
Abu Hanifa also cited an opposing opinion based on analogy (*qiyas*), arguing that since the wall was built on the owner's land and did not fall due to their action, liability should not apply, similar to cases where no demand was made, the fall occurred before the lean, or demolition was impossible. Moreover, if liability were obligatory, demanding demolition would not be a prerequisite, unlike when the wall leans towards another's property from the outset.