He was also asked:

A man owes a debt arising from a guarantee he has given and has no means of paying it except through his work. He wishes to go away as a mu'allam to earn some money, providing someone to guarantee his appearance. Is it permissible to imprison him, or should he be allowed to do this? If the creditor claims that he can meet his obligation under the guarantee, while he claims that he cannot, is the creditor’s statement to be accepted? Must he produce evidence?

He replied:

Rather, he must be allowed to repay the debt by whatever means are available to him, and he may not be imprisoned if he does so. If he claims insolvency but is known to have possessed property, his claim is not accepted without evidence. If he is not known to have possessed property, his statement, supported by his oath, is accepted over that of his creditor. This is the position of al-Shāfi'ī and Ahmad. Mālik’s position is similar, and a number of scholars have also reported this position from Abū Hanīfah.