Does a judge's ruling alter the inherent legal status or reality of a matter?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Judiciary
Primary text
The ruling of a judge does not remove a thing from its inherent characteristic or status, according to the majority of scholars, including Malik, Al-Awza'i, Al-Shafi'i, Ahmad, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, Dawud, and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. The evidence against nullifying the inherent status is derived from the Prophet's statement, "I am merely a human, and you bring disputes to me, and perhaps some of you are more eloquent in presenting their argument than others. Thus I judge according to what I hear from you. Whoever I award a right belonging to his brother, let him not take anything of it, for I am only cutting off a piece of Fire for him." This established principle includes cases where one claims ownership of something, and the judge rules in their favor based on false testimony; the ill-gotten gain is not made lawful. If a ruling is based on false testimony, it does not permit what was previously forbidden.
Supporting text
Abu Hanifa holds that if a judge rules concerning a contract, dissolution, or divorce, the ruling is effective outwardly and inwardly. Therefore, if a judge separates a couple based on two intentionally false witnesses testifying to a divorce, one of the witnesses, knowing his falsehood, may subsequently marry the woman after her waiting period. Similarly, if a man falsely claims marriage to a woman, supports it with false witnesses, and the judge rules accordingly, she becomes lawfully his wife. This view is supported by a narration concerning Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) where he confirmed a marriage based on testimony, stating, "Your two witnesses have married you to him."