The Contradiction between Inner and Outer Clear Proofs (Bayyinah)

The conflict among various pieces of evidence or clear signs is one of the important legal topics. An example of conflict or contradiction is when two just witnesses bear witness in favor of the plaintiff and then they are contradicted by other two just witnesses who testify to something in favor of the denier or defendant. This issue is thus discussed under The Contradiction between Inner and Outer Clear Proofs. It has been stated by jurisprudents that if the two parties to a legal case have control over the contended object, both of the two sides are made to swear. If they refuse to do so, the thing will be halved between them. Some jurisprudents such as Sheikh Tusi maintain that the denier has no right to present two witnesses. He has the right to declare an oath, not to present any witnesses. Some other jurisprudents such as Allamah Hilli holds that the denier has the right to present witnesses but he has stated that the denier has the right in non-judicial matters. However, people like Abu Salah al-Halabi believe that the denier also has the right to present witnesses and that in cases of contradiction between proofs of the two parties, the denier’s proof will take precedence over the claimant’s. Some jurisprudents such as late Naraqi and Imam Khomeini (ra) are of the view that in the case of a conflict, the denier’s proofs will precede. Of course, every group of scholars has presented its own reason to prove its argument. However, the writer believes that in the existence of a conflict between an inner and outer proof, none of the two proofs is preferred and as both proofs cannot be discarded either, the solution is that both parties are made to swear and the decision will be made in favor of the one who is currently holding possession of the disputed object.