Conflict between Principal and Prima Facie in Jurisprudence of Islamic Denominations

In Islamic Sharia, the rule of conflict between principal and prima facie is of high importance. An application of this rule is in trials. Based on the rule of “burden of proof rests upon claimant, and the oath upon who denies”, the burden of proof thus rests on the plaintiff. One of the criteria to distinguish between the claimant and the denier is through paying attention to the principal and prima facie. A claimant is one whose word is against the principal and prima facie. In presumptions where the principal is expressive of a topic and the prima facie is indicative of a topic against the former, the conflict between principal and prima facie arises. If the prima facie is one of the famous proofs of Islamic law and a circumstance passed by the legislator such as a tradition with a single narrator, testimony, confession and the like, there is no doubt about the priority of the prima facie over the principal; however, if the prima facie is derived from indications, customs, preponderance and prevalence and the like, there will be disagreement among jurisprudents as to whether the prima facie takes priority or the principal. Based on the aspect of certainty or the preference in all sheer probabilities (without any evidence) and apparent meanings relying on unfounded causes which are of doubtful validity, the principal is given priority over the prima facie. Even if the principal is in conflict with a probability with weak evidence, it takes priority over the prima facie again. In addition to the cases mentioned above, when both sides of a dispute are regarded as equal by a mujtahid, opinions and views will differ sometimes among different denominations and sometimes among scholars of one denomination on the priority of the principal or prima facie.