Section: It is not permissible to grant a judicial appointment to a person on the condition that he rules according to a specific school of thought. This is the school of al-Shafi'i, and I am not aware of any disagreement regarding this, because Allah the Almighty said: "Judge between people with truth" (38). Truth is not restricted to one school of thought, and the truth may become apparent to him in a school other than that one. If he appoints him upon this condition, the condition is void, and there are two views regarding the invalidity of the appointment, based on the invalidity of conditions in sales.

Section: If the Imam delegates the appointment of a judge to a person, it is permissible, because it is permissible for him to undertake that himself, so it is permissible for him to appoint a representative for it, just like a sale. If he delegates the selection of a judge to him, it is permissible, but it is not permissible for him to select himself, his father, or his son, just as if he were to appoint him as an agent for charity with property, it would not be permissible for him to take it himself or give it to these two. It is possible that it is permissible for him to select them if they are fit for the authority, because they are included in the generality of those whom he has authorized for selection, given their eligibility; thus they are like strangers.

Section: A judge does not have the right to judge for himself, just as it is not permissible for him to testify for himself. If a legal dispute arises between him and some people, it is permissible for him to litigate against them before some of his deputies or some of his subjects. Umar litigated against Ubayy before Zayd (40), and he litigated against an Iraqi man before Shurayh (41). Ali litigated against a Jew before Shurayh (40), and Uthman litigated against Talhah before Jubayr ibn Mut'im (41). If a legal dispute arises for his parents, or his child, or someone whose testimony for him is not accepted (42), there are two views. One of them is that it is not permissible for him to judge the matter himself, and if he does judge (43), his ruling is not effective. This is the position of Abu Hanifa and al-Shafi'i, because his testimony for them is not accepted, so his ruling for them is not effective, just like for himself. The second view is that his ruling is effective. This was chosen by Abu Bakr, and it is the view of Abu Yusuf, Ibn al-Mundhir, and Abu Thawr, because it is a judgment for someone other than himself; it is akin to strangers. According to the first view...