Is the testimony of a slave accepted in Hadd punishments and Qisas?

Primary text

There are two probable opinions regarding Qisas. First, the testimony is accepted because it involves a right of a human being that cannot be retracted after confession, thus resembling financial rights. Second, the testimony is not accepted because it is a bodily punishment averted by doubts, thus resembling Hadd punishments. Two narrations exist regarding all corporal punishments (Hadd and Qisas): one accepts the testimony because the slave is a just man, like a free man; the second rejects it. The second view is the apparent doctrine, as the disagreement over accepting testimony in financial matters shows deficiency and doubt, thus testimony should not be accepted in matters averted by doubt. Furthermore, being deficient in status, the slave's testimony should not be accepted in Hadd and Qisas, similar to a woman.