How should conflicting witness testimonies regarding ownership duration be prioritized?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Claims and Evidences
Primary text
When one witness testifies to ownership existing for one year, and another testifies to ownership existing for two years, the apparent reading of Al-Khiraqi suggests parity between the two testimonies. This view aligns with one opinion attributed to Al-Shafi'i. The primary basis for parity is that if the witness testifying to newer ownership were prioritized because they might possess knowledge the first lacked (analogous to a situation where one claims purchase or gift from the other, in which case the newer claim is prioritized by agreement), and yet this factor does not grant preference, then at minimum, equality must result. Furthermore, the argument that the older testimony proves ownership in the past without contradiction is countered by stating that past ownership is established only as a consequence of present ownership. If one were to claim past ownership in isolation, the claim and its evidence would be dismissed.
Supporting text
The opinion of Al-Qadi, aligning with Abu Hanifa and a second view of Al-Shafi'i, mandates prioritizing the testimony with the older date. This is because the testimony proving earlier establishment of ownership proves the right at a time when the other evidence did not contest it, thus establishing ownership for that earlier period, allowing the claimant to demand subsequent increase or benefit from that time. Since the two testimonies conflict regarding present ownership, they nullify each other, leaving the established prior ownership to continue, preventing anyone else from establishing a right except through the prior claimant.