Özet:

In Islamic jurisprudence, testimony is the most general one among the instruments presented by a complainant to prove his case. In this regard, it is accepted as a part of jurisdiction and trial. The points such as the conditions for validity and minimum number of testimony whose legitimacy is based directly upon the Holy Qoran have been considered quite broadly in Islamic law books from the first period. What matters is the presence of the witness in person in the case; however, in some cases, the witness’s coming to the court may not be possible. In this case, the main witness can send someone else instead, and this is called “shahādah alā al-shahādah” in literature. A witness’s revocation by declaring that he has borne false or inaccurate testimony after a verdict is given based on the declaration of witnesses is also a generally confronted case. Provided that this kind of case burdens one of the parties with financial debt, the witness’s revocation will lead to victimisation, and a debt of compensation will arise for the witness who revokes in some cases. Revocation from testimony can be thought for the main and proxy witnesses. However, there are some differences between the main witness’s revocation and the proxy witness’s revocation regarding the verdict. This study tried to analyse the issue including the influence of one or several witnesses’ revocation after a verdict is given on compensation responsibility in a financial case in which proxy witnesses are present and called “atabah issue” in Hanafī Literature.

Anahtar Kelimeler: