Constitution of the Caliphate State / Judiciary
- Category: Judiciary §75-95
Article 88: The judge of the Court of Injustices (Madhalim) is appointed by the Khalifah, or by the Supreme Judge. His accounting, discipline and removal are done by the Khalifah or by the Supreme Judge if the Khalifah had given him the powers to do so. However he cannot be removed during his investigation of a Madhlamah against the Khalifah, or the executive assistants, or the Supreme Judge; rather the power to remove him in these circumstances is for the Court of Injustice Acts (Madhalim).
The judge of Madhalim is appointed by the Khalifah, or by the Supreme Judge. This is because the Madhalim is part of the judiciary, for they are the conveying of the Shari’ah rule by way of enforcement, and all the types of judges must be appointed by the Khalifah. This is confirmed by the Messenger of Allah’s actions since he used to appoint the judges as was explained previously. All this means that it is the Khalifah who appoints the judge of Madhalim, yet the Supreme Judge could appoint the judge of Madhalim if the Khalifah made provisions for this in his appointment clause. It is allowed for the main court of injustices (Mahkamat Al-Madhalim) in the centre of the State to examine only the Madhalim that occurred from the Khalifah, his assistants and the Supreme Judge. However, the branches of the court of injustices in the provinces examine the Madhalim that occur from the governors and the other State employees. The Khalifah has the right to give the Central Court of Injustices the authority of appointment and removal of the Madhalim judges in the branch Madhalim courts that come under its authority in the provinces.
The Khalifah is the one that appoints and removes the members of the main court of injustices in the centre of the State. As for the removal of the head of the central court of injustices - in other words, the Madhalim judge responsible in examining the removal of the Khalifah - it should in principle be the right of the Khalifah to remove him, as it is he who has the right to appoint him like all the judges. However, it is possible, if the power of removing the judge were left to the Khalifah during a case, then this power would lead to something prohibited. In such a situation the principle of
(الوسيلة إلى الحرام حرام)
“the means to something forbidden is also forbidden”
would apply. The strong likelihood of such a scenario arising is enough for applying this principle.
This situation is when there is a case against the Khalifah or his assistants or his Supreme Judge (in case the Khalifah was given the mandatory power of appointing and removing the Madhalim judge). This is because keeping the mandatory power of removing the Madhalim judge in the hands of the Khalifah in this case would influence the verdict by the judge and accordingly it would limit the capability of the judge to remove the Khalifah or his assistants if deemed necessary. This mandatory power of removing the judge in this case is a means for Haram, or in other words, leaving it in the hand of the Khalifah in this case is prohibited.
As for the remaining cases, the rule remains as it is; in other words, the power of removing the Madhalim judge is left to the Khalifah, just like his appointment.