Is the testimony regarding the identity of an absconded slave sufficient for handover based solely on a magistrate's letter?

Primary text

The slave who has absconded and is in the possession of a magistrate must be surrendered if the master provides valid testimony concerning the slave's description to a magistrate in a different jurisdiction, and that magistrate confirms the testimony via a letter. This is the position held by Abu Yusuf and one opinion of Al-Shafi'i. Abu Yusuf stipulates that collateral must be taken because the testimony establishes identity by description, similar to a documented debt (*salam*). The rationale supporting this view is that a magistrate's letter concerning an absent person is accepted, and the subject of the judgment is held based on name, lineage, and description; therefore, the same standard applies here. Upon confirmation of the obligation to surrender, the receiving magistrate must place a tight cord around the slave's neck, preventing escape, and deliver the slave to the claimant or their agent, who then transports the slave to the corresponding magistrate so witnesses can confirm the slave's physical identity.