section_path: Qualifications
section_name: Qualifications
paragraph_text: Qualifications
  
  A qadi must (per the cited source) be a male adult, free, a Muslim, sane, unconvicted of slander and educated in Islamic sciences. His performance must be totally congruent with Sharia (Islamic law) without using his own interpretation. In a trial in front of a qadi, it is the plaintiff who is responsible for bringing evidence against the defendant to have him or her convicted. There are no appeals to the judgements of a qadi. A qadi must exercise his office in a public place, the chief mosque is recommended, or, in his own house, where the public should have free access. The qadi had authority over a territory whose diameter was equivalent to a day's walk. The opening of a trial theoretically required the presence of both the plaintiff and the defendant. If a plaintiff's adversary resided in another judicial district, the plaintiff could present his evidence before the qadi of his own district, who would then write to the judge of the district in which the defendant resided and expose the evidence against him. The addressee qadi summoned the defendant and convicted him on that basis. Qadis kept court records in their archives (diwan) and handed them over to their successors once they had been dismissed.
  
  Qadis must not receive gifts from participants in trials and must be careful in engaging themselves in trade. Despite the rules governing the office, Muslim history is full of complaints about qadis. It has often been a problem that qadis have been managers of waqfs, religious endowments.
  
  The qualifications that a qadi must possess are stated in the law, but the law is not uniform on this subject. The minimal requirement upon which all the jurists agree is that a qadi possess the same qualifications as a witness in court: being be free, sane, adult, trustworthy, and a Muslim. Some require that they also possess the qualifications of a jurist, that is, that they be well versed in the law, bur others regard those qualifications as simply preferable and imply that a person may effectively discharge the duties of the office without being well versed in the law. The latter position presupposed that a qadi who is not learned in matters of law would consult those who are before reaching a decision. Indeed, consultation was urged upon the learned qadi as well since even the learned are fallible and can profit from the views of others. Those consulted did not, however, have a voice in the final decision-making. The Islamic court was a strictly one-judge court, and the final decision rested upon the shoulders of a single qadi.