The Status of Rulings Issued by Judges Without Basic Conditions (With an Emphasis on Ijtihad) Based on Islamic Government Jurisprudence

Abstract

The rulings issued by judges without basic qualifications, especially non-mujtahid judges, are investigated in this article to identify their position and evaluate it from the perspective of Islamic governmental jurisprudence using a descriptive-analytical method. After examining the views of famous jurists regarding the existence of judgment conditions and the need for a judge to possess the specialized degree of ijtihad and the ability to derive Shariah rulings from the sources of jurisprudence and evaluating their evidence, the conclusion was reached that the implication of their most important evidence, i.e. "consensus", "verses" And the traditions forbidding actions other than knowledge", "verses commanding the ruler to obey God", "narrations indicating the need for the judge to be knowledgeable" and "the principle of non-wilayah" are not complete and are confused. On the other hand, the arguments of the rival point of view, which considers the votes issued by mock judges to be valid, are stronger; What is the fact that the social view of Islamic jurisprudence and the approach of government jurisprudence also do not accept the invalidity of unqualified judges' opinions (ijtihad) and disruption of the social order of the society, putting people in dire straits and embarrassment, and these matters are not in line with Islamic teachings. Therefore, expediency, as the basis of the legislation of Islamic laws, requires that the opinions of mock judges appointed by the Mujtahid Jame al-Sharai't be considered valid and valid, so that the people's claims do not remain undecided and the resolution of people's disputes, which is a rational obligation, is not delayed.