Say that we are handed a 1D quantum mechanical system, which satisfies the canonical commutation relation
$$\tag{1} [\hat{Q},\hat{P}]~=~ i\hbar~{\bf 1}, $$
and handed some choice of eigenstates $|q\rangle$ and $|p\rangle$ for every value of $q,p\in\mathbb{R}$. The eigenstates satisfy
$$\tag{2} \hat{Q} \mid q \rangle ~=~q\mid q \rangle, \qquad
\hat{P}\mid p \rangle ~=~p\mid p \rangle , $$
$$\tag{3} \langle q \mid q^{\prime} \rangle~=~\delta(q-q^{\prime}), \qquad
\langle p \mid p^{\prime} \rangle~=~\delta(p-p^{\prime}),$$
$$\tag{4}\int_{\mathbb{R}} \!dq~ \mid q \rangle\langle q \mid~=~{\bf 1}, \qquad
\int_{\mathbb{R}} \!dp~ \mid p \rangle\langle p \mid~=~{\bf 1}. $$
Eigenstates (2) are not uniquely defined. One could in principle re-define them with phase factors
$$\tag{5} |q \rangle ~\longrightarrow~ |q \rangle^{\prime}~:=~f(q)|q \rangle, \qquad |p \rangle ~\longrightarrow~ |p \rangle^{\prime}~:=~g(p)|p \rangle, $$
where $f$ and $g$ are two phase factors $|f|=|g|=1$. The new basis would also satisfy eqs. (2-4). Thus if the enemy has chosen the eigenstates (2) for us, we should (as a minimum) expect that the position and momentum Schrödinger representation could contain non-trivial phase factors
$$\tag{6} \hat{Q}~=~q, \qquad \frac{i}{\hbar}\hat{P}~=~ \frac{1}{f(q)}\frac{\partial}{\partial q} f(q)~=~ \frac{\partial}{\partial q} +\frac{f^{\prime}(q)}{f(q)}, $$
and
$$\tag{7} \hat{P}~=~p, \qquad \frac{1}{i\hbar}\hat{Q}~=~ \frac{1}{g(p)}\frac{\partial}{\partial p} g(p)~=~ \frac{\partial}{\partial p} +\frac{g^{\prime}(p)}{g(p)}, $$
respectively. Note that the two Schrödinger representations (6-7) are consistent with the CCR (1). [On the other hand, it turns out that eqs. (6-7) constitute the most general position and momentum Schrödinger representations, respectively. This may e.g. be established from knowing the most general form of the $\langle p \mid q \rangle$ overlap, see e.g. this Phys.SE answer.]
Now let us return to OP's question. Assume that
$\hat{P}=-i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial q}$, i.e. that the position phase factor $f(q)$ is a constant (independent of $q$) in eq. (6). This does not imply that $\hat{Q}=i\hbar\frac{\partial}{\partial p}$, i.e. that the momentum phase factor $g(p)$ is a constant as well in eq. (7).
We stress that the two phase factors in eqs. (6-7) are not just an academic exercise. Often, one would of course try to chose eigenstates (2) such that phase factors $f$ and $g$ vanish, as is usually assumed in elementary textbooks. However, in actual quantum systems, this may not be possible for various reasons, e.g. dependence of external parameters, or topological obstructions. In such situations the phase factors $f$ and $g$ may have important physical consequences.