whom the judge knows to have such a defect, his testimony is inadmissible without attestation of his uprightness. An unqualified attestation is not accepted; it is accepted only from someone who knew of his defect and testifies that he has repented of it and abandoned it. According to Mālik’s position, someone who has received the prescribed punishment for accusing another of unchastity has the same status: an unqualified attestation of his uprightness is insufficient; it must be based on knowledge of his increased righteousness.
As for a witness who persists in a disqualifying defect and is notorious for it, his testimony is inadmissible, and no attestation of his uprightness is accepted, even if one is given. Such an attestation can be valid only for the future, if he repents. As for a false witness, his testimony is never admissible, even if he repents and his conduct improves. Abū Zayd, however, related from Ibn al-Qāsim that his testimony is admissible if he repents and his repentance becomes evident through his increasing righteousness. He said, “So far as I know, this is Mālik’s position.” Some understood these to be conflicting opinions. Others understood Abū Zayd’s report to concern someone who comes forward repentant and humbly imploring forgiveness, confessing to having borne false witness before he is exposed. This is the more apparent interpretation. Allah knows best.
Section
If a witness develops a disqualifying defect after giving testimony, his testimony becomes inadmissible in future cases, and his testimony in the present case is invalidated. It has also been said—and this is Ibn al-Mājishūn’s position—that his testimony in the present case is not invalidated if the defect consists of an overt act, such as wounding, killing, or the like. Suspicion of bias arising after testimony has been given, however, does not invalidate it. An example is a man who marries a woman after testifying in her favour, or becomes involved in a dispute with a man after testifying against him.
Section
As for suspicion of bias affecting part of the testimony, it invalidates the testimony in its entirety according to the well-known, established position of the school. An example is a man who testifies that someone owes a thousand dirhams to him and his son, or to him and an unrelated person, arising from a transaction, a loan, or the like. Regarding the testimony of a witness called upon to attest that a man has made a monetary bequest to him and to others, al-Mudawwana and other works contain disagreement