Reconciliation
Its Definition
Reconciliation is contract between two disputants in order to solve their problems peacefully. For example, if someone believes and claims to have some rights due from another, and the defendant confesses to it although he does not know about it, thus, a reconciliation is made to avoid any further dispute over it as well as to get rid of any swearing, which would be required of him in the case of his denial.
Its Ruling
Reconciliation is a permissible act. Allah (SWT) said:
(There is no sin on them both if they make terms of reconciliation between themselves; and making reconciliation is better.) (4:128)
The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:
“ Reconciliation among the Muslims is permissible, except the reconciliation which makes unlawful something which is lawful or makes lawful what is unlawful.”
(Abu Dawud and At-Tirmithi, who graded it Sahih )
Its Categories
There are three types of reconciliation related to financial matters:
A. Reconciliation on the claim or agreement. This is when someone claims some right upon another, and the latter agree to give him what he claims in order to reconcile without denying the plaintiff his right. For example, he deducts some amount from the loan, which he originally agreed to pay him. It could also be giving him a gift from the asset that he confessed to pay for. It could also be making reconciliation by giving something other than what he agreed. For example, he agreed to give him a house, but he gives him some cash payment, or he agreed to give him an animal, but instead he gives him a garment.
B. Reconciliation with denial.[1] A person claims that he has some right over another, but the defendant denies it. Thereafter, he makes reconciliation to give something in order to drop his claim over it, because he wishes to avoid any dispute and swearing that is required of him if he denies the claim.
C. Reconciliation over silence. This is when a person claims some right upon another. However, the defendant remains silent, neither confirming nor denying it. Therefore, the defendant makes some reconciliation with the plaintiff so that he will drop the claim and abandon the dispute.
___________________________________________
[1]Imam Ash-Shafi‘I, may Allah have mercy upon him, was of the view that a reconciliation is not valid in the case of denial, contrary to the view of the majority.
----------------------------------------------
Its regulations
The following are the laws of the reconciliation:
1) The reconciliation concerning a thing that is claimed without taking it is similar to a sale. In terms of permissibility, restrictions and other related rules of trading, such as returning what is defective, receiving it or rejecting it in case of injustice and inequity, and preemption on the neighboring properties that are undivided, etc. All these rules are similar to that of reconciliation. Therefore, if a person has a claim against another regarding a house and he reconciled with him for a garment, however, he made a condition that it should not be worn by so-and-so, then in such case reconciliation is not valid. This is because it will be like a sale in which he made a condition that invalidates the contract. If someone claims a cash payment of dinars, but the other reconciled with the payment dirhams on credit, such reconciliation is not valid. This is because possession of the currency on the spot is the condition of the deal when exchanging currencies. If a person claims a garden, but the other reconciles with a half of the house, the partner of the house has the right to demand the preemption of half of it in which the reconciliation was made. If a person made reconciliation by accepting an animal due to a claim, and then he found it to be defective, he is then free to accept it or return it. Likewise, reconciliation made with the kinds of items that are different than that which he claims is similar to selling in the rest of its rulings.
2) If one of the two reconcilers knows that he is lying, his reconciliation is invalid, and whatever he takes by way of reconciliation is forbidden for him.
3) Whoever confesses to have an obligation, but he refuses to fulfill it unless he is given something (in return), then that is not permissible for him. This is like a person who confesses to owing a thousand dinars, but he refuses to pay it unless five hundred of it is deducted. However, if he does not make any condition to deduct anything from it, but the person to whom the money is due gives a generous grant from himself or he deducts from the amount owed due to the intercession of someone else, the confessor is allowed to accept it. This is due to the authentic narration in which the Messenger of Allah (SAW) told the people whom Jabir owed a debt to decrease his debt by half. (AL-Bukhari)
It is also reported that Ka ‘b bin Malik sought repayment of a debt from Ibn Abi Hadrad in the Masjid and their voices became so loud that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) heard them in his apartment. Thus, he came out to them and called Ka ‘b Ka ‘b answered, “I am here at your service, O Messenger of Allah.” Then the Prophet (SAW) made a gesture to him to lower his debt by half. Ka ‘b replied, “I have already done so, O Messenger of Allah.” The Prophet (SAW) then said (to Ibn Abi Hadrad): “ Get up and pay him .” (AL-Bukhari)
4) If he reconciles with his partner that he will open a window or a door in a wall for a specific compensation, such reconciliation is valid because it is similar to a trade.
Textual Format for Writing an Agreement of Reconciliation
In the Name of Allah (SWT). All praise is due to Allah and may peace and blessings be upon His Prophet (SAW).
“So-and-so has reconciled with so-and-so due to his claim that he owns and has the right to such and such house (being specific and mentioning its features). So-and-so defendant currently possesses this house. After they both disputed over this claim, the first reconciler confessed to what the other claims. It is endorsed by legal attestation that the amount to be paid for reconciliation is such and such dirhams, or to give such and such things as a legalized reconciliation. Both are satisfied with this and agree to it. The first reconciler has paid to the second everything that is to be paid as the reconciliation, and he possessed the same in a completely legal manner. The above-mentioned second reconciler has agreed that he does not have any further right or dues upon the first reconciler in demanding anything related to the house. He also has no claim, demand, ownership or semi-ownership, benefit, right to benefit, or anything else small or large. They both agree to all of this as a legal agreement. This is executed by such and such method.”