Is an oath required from the defendant in a defamation (*qadhf*) case when the plaintiff alleges the act and the defendant denies it?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Ḥudūd (Prescribed Penalties)
Primary text
The defendant in a defamation accusation is not to be sworn in (i.e., no required oath). This view is held by Al-Sha'bi, Hammad, Al-Thawri, and the Ashab al-Ra'y (people of opinion). The ruling is based on the principle that since defamation is a prescribed punishment (Hadd), an oath is not administered in such cases, similar to Zina (adultery) and theft. If the defendant refuses to swear an oath (nukool), the prescribed punishment is not executed because Hadd punishments are repelled by doubts, and execution based on refusal to swear is disallowed, just as in other Hadd cases.
Supporting text
It is narrated from Ahmad, and this is the opinion of Al-Zuhri, Malik, Al-Shafi'i, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir, that the defendant should be sworn in, citing the Prophet's saying, "But the oath is upon the one against whom the claim is made," and analogizing it to debts, as it is a right pertaining to a human being.