What is the ruling on a family member of an accused thief swearing an oath on his behalf, and what are the consequences for the one who swears the oath if the accused's innocence is proven at the time of the oath, or if his guilt is later established, and what is the ruling on taking money in cases where tribal customs are applied?

It is permissible for someone who has accused a person of theft, and does not have proof, to ask the accused to swear an oath, unless the accused is known for their righteousness. It is not permissible for another person to swear on behalf of the accused, because an oath does not accept representation, unless the one swearing is denying their knowledge that the accused is the thief. If it is later proven that the accused is indeed the thief, they shall be fined for what they stole, and the prescribed punishment shall be carried out by the authorities if the conditions are met; otherwise, they deserve disciplinary action. It is not permissible to fine them more than that.