Council and collective arbitration

In Islamic jurisprudence, arbitration is recognized as having the same nature as judgment, and it is considered to be a type of judgment itself. In the position of distinguishing the authority that issues judgments, the jurists have placed the judge of tahakim (which is the same as the referee) next to the judge appointed for the purpose of the chapter of hostility.In Imami jurisprudence, the possibility of collective judgment and arbitration is sometimes accepted in cases such as the issuance of a verdict in the case of a consensus of several judges. Also, the division of time or regional or jurisdictional work among judges has been accepted; However, considering the difference between collective judgment and council judgment, what is important is the answer to the question of whether it is possible for council judgment and arbitration by maintaining the independence of each judge and arbitrator and with the criterion of accepting the majority opinion, based on the jurisprudential foundations of the Islamic legal system. Legitimacy was given, and if legitimacy is proven, what evidence can support this way of judgment and arbitration?The issue of council judgment in jurisprudence texts has been less addressed by jurists. There is a possibility that the lack of consistent and lengthy jurisprudential literature on this issue is due to the silence of the Shariah and the lack of a narrative reason with a direct and explicit implication in negating and proving the legitimacy of the council's judgment and arbitration. However, the silence of the Shariah in proving the legitimacy of the council's judgment and the lack of coherent jurisprudential literature is not considered a valid reason for denying its legitimacy.