How can the fatwa stating that a person afflicted by urinary incontinence or flatulence cannot lead prayers be reconciled with the principle that "whoever's prayer is valid, their imamate is valid"?

Scholars have differed on the ruling concerning the imamate of a person suffering from urinary incontinence or similar conditions. The relied-upon opinion for us is that whoever's prayer is valid for himself, it is valid for others. However, it is preferable for such a person not to lead healthy people in prayer, to avoid divergence of opinions.

The jurisprudential maxim "Whoever's prayer is valid for himself, it is valid for others" is not a definitive proof and is not applied in all circumstances because it is a general rule, not a universal one. For instance, a woman's prayer is valid, but her leadership of men in prayer is not valid. Similarly, the prayer of a person with an excuse is valid out of necessity, but it does not necessarily follow that his leadership in prayer is valid when there is no necessity.

The accredited opinion for us is the validity of the imamate of a person with an excuse.