Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(76) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies: 

 "Ruling on the Financing System for the Housing of the General Corporation of Social Security Employees on Basis of Islamic Murabaha in Favor of the One Ordering the Purchase“

Date: 13/4/1425 AH, corresponding to 2/6/2004 AD.    

 

 

Question:

To how extent do the regulations pertaining to the financing of the housing of the General Corporation of Social Security employees agree with the rules of Islamic Sharia?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

After careful study and deliberation, the Board made the following remarks:

Article (2) defines the one ordering the purchase,  or a  purchaser as: The General Manager/employee. The Board recommends deleting the word (purchaser), whether it comes alone or accompanied by (the one ordering the purchase). It also recommends defining (the one ordering the purchase) as every employee of the General Corporation of Social Security.

Article (9/D) states: “After presenting the irrevocable power of attorney and a letter from the concerned Directorate of Lands Registration indicating that the estate is free of any rights that hinder disposing of it, the Social Security Corporation shall issue a letter of promise to the landlord , whereby it pledges to pay off the agreed upon price.”

 

The Board is of the view that the irrevocable power of attorney doesn`t mean that the authorized has actually possessed the estate, which makes this contract in contradiction with the rules of Sharia which prohibit selling an item that isn`t in the sellers` possession; therefore, the item must get possessed and guaranteed by the one ordered  to purchase it, then transferred, through a valid sale contract, to the possession of the one ordering the purchase. Moreover, in order for this proxy to become tantamount to possessing the estate, it should clearly stipulate that the Social Security Corporation shall guarantee the purchased estate completely. Therefore, the Board is of the view that clause (D) of article (9) should read as follows:

“Issuing a promissory letter by the Social Security Corporation to the landlord whereby it shall guarantee settling the agreed upon price after presenting the irrevocable power of attorney, which must state clearly that the Corporation shall guarantee the purchased estate completely, and a letter from the concerned Lands` Registration Directorate indicating that the estate is free of any rights that hinder disposing of it.”

 

It is permissible for the Corporation to ratify the irrevocable power of attorney enclosed with the regulations pertaining to the financing system of the housing of the Corporation`s employees since it clearly states that the Corporation shall guarantee the purchased estate completely, and in order to become permissible in Sharia once the item, ordered to be purchased {Murabaha}, becomes in the possession and guarantee of the Corporation. This is also because the temporary law pertaining to the immovable property, 26/2003, issued on 16/4/2003 has been included within item (4) of clause (o), article (11): stipulates that an authorized person, or any other party may not initiate any action whatsoever, including  the execution of immovable properties included within the irrevocable power of attorney after its inscription in the trade register of these properties at the concerned lands` registration department.

Article (4/A) states: “Housing financing through Murabaha shall be granted after two years pass over the classification of an employee of the Corporation.”

The Board recommends replacing the word (classification) with the word (recruitment).

Article (8/A&B) include grammatical mistakes that must be corrected. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Iftaa` Board

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen Al-Tamimi

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

Dr. Abdulmajeed Al-Salaheen

Dr. Abdullah Al-Manasrah

Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Should one fulfill his vow of donating an animal to the poor and needy with one sheep although he had repeated the vow several times?

Each vow has to be fulfilled, and repeating the words of the same vow for confirmation renders its fulfillment obligatory as one vow. As for multiple vows, they have to be fulfilled as well.

I missed fasting 30 days of the obligatory fast within the last 6 years and 20 days. How do I fast? And what should I do? 

Missed fasting days must be made up, and it is permissible to make them up on non-consecutive days, as continuity is not required for making up missed fasts. Additionally, expiation (Fidya) must be given: feeding one needy person for each day if the makeup is delayed for one year. If the delay extends to two years, Fidya must be given to two needy people per day, and so on. And Allah Knows Best.
 
 
 
 
 

We collect funds from mosques and other sources, saying: "For the poor, the needy, widows, orphans, and those who do not beg insistently." After paying the stipends of the families registered with the Zakat Committee, an amount exceeding 6,000 dinars remained. Is it permissible for me to save it for upcoming months when I may not be able to collect the stipends?

These funds are received by the committee as representatives of the zakat payers to deliver zakat to those entitled to it. It is well-known that delaying zakat while being able to pay it is not permissible. Imam Al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "Zakat must be paid immediately if one is able to do so, by the presence of wealth and the eligible categories." [Al-Minhaj] Therefore, the committee must distribute the zakat to the eligible recipients without installment payments or using it to purchase material goods for them, as the committee does not have authority over the poor to allocate it in this way. And Allah Knows Best.

Is it permissible for a person who had vowed to give a certain amount of money to another, but didn`t find the latter to donate that money to the mosque?

In principle, the vowing person should abide by his vow as much as possible. Therefore, if he couldn`t find the person that he had made the vow for, then the vow itself is countless and nothing is due on its maker. However, if the latter happens to find the former later on then, he has to give him that money.