Articles

The Iftaa` Department Refrains from Interfering in the Judiciary
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 23-03-2023

The Iftaa` Department Refrains from Interfering in the Judiciary

 

 

Some media reported that the General Iftaa` Department refrained from issuing a Fatwa on the inadmissibility of the testimony of the woman who doesn`t wear Hijab.

 

In response to this claim, the Department wishes to make clear that the requested Fatwa is related to a case pending before the court. Therefore, it refrained from issuing that Fatwa to ensure the impartiality and independence of the judiciary system, the integrity of its provisions and non-interference in its affairs, as provided for in the legislations in force. This is to achieve justice and preserve the rights of the litigants.

 

The Department asserts that non-interference in cases pending before the court is its adopted approach since its establishment to safeguard the integrity of litigation from any external influences.

 

Only Allah leads to prosperity and guides to the straight path•

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

Are school exams a valid excuse for breaking the fast in Ramadan?

School and university exams are not considered a valid excuse for breaking the fast, as most students take their exams while fasting without experiencing extreme hardship. Fasting does not conflict with exam preparation, and a Muslim seeks strength in obedience to Allah for both worldly and spiritual matters.

Is it permissible to include others in the reward of one`s sacrifice?

 

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible for the person offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) to include others in the spiritual reward of the sacrifice. However, it is not permissible for multiple people to jointly share the purchase price of a single sheep or goat, unless one person gifts the money to the other.
 
It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (6/137) by Al-Khatib al-Shirbini:
 
"If a person includes someone else in the reward of his sacrifice and slaughters it on his own behalf, it is permissible."
 
It should be carefully noted that including someone else in the reward of one's sacrifice is completely distinct from offering a sacrifice on behalf of someone else. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

Is it permissible to purchase the Udhiyah on installments?

It is permissible to purchase the sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyyah) on installments or by borrowing its price. However, it is not recommended for the poor to do so, because they are not required to offer a sacrifice, and Allah does not burden a soul beyond its capacity. If doing so would lead to negligence in providing for one's dependents (nafaqah wājibah), then giving precedence to obligatory maintenance over borrowing to buy the sacrifice is appropriate. This is based on the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): "It is sufficient sin for a person to withhold food from those whom he is responsible to support."
 
Furthermore, the sacrifice is valid from one who has a debt, but it is preferable (awlā) to repay the debt first, especially if the debt is due immediately (ḥāll). And Allah Almighty knows best.

Must a woman seek her husband's permission to fast a make up fast (qada)?

● If there is ample time to make up for the missed fasts, a woman should seek her husband's permission before fasting.
● However, if the time is running out—such as when only the remaining days of Sha'ban are sufficient to complete the qada—she does not need his permission and must fast, because Allah’s command takes precedence over the husband's consent.