If the guardians of the victim's blood demand the blood money, and the perpetrator demands retribution (qisas), is it permissible to compel the perpetrator to accept the blood money?

The jurists differed regarding whether the blood guardian's choice to take diyah (blood money) is contingent on the offender's consent. The Hanafis and Malikis held that forgiveness in exchange for diyah is not permissible without the offender's consent. The Shafi'is and Hanbalis, according to the relied-upon opinion, held that the consequence of intentional killing is qisas (retaliation), and diyah is a substitute for it when qisas is waived. Therefore, if qisas is forgiven and diyah is chosen, it becomes obligatory without being contingent on the offender's consent. This is the more preponderant opinion, based on the Prophet's (peace and blessings be upon him) saying: "Whoever has a slain person, then he has the choice of two matters: either he is given, meaning the diyah, or the family of the slain person is allowed to retaliate."