عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(222): "The Sums Wrongly Transferred by (S.S.C) to the Deceased's Account"

Date Added : 21-04-2016

 

Resolution No.(222) By the Board of Iftaa, Research and Islamic Studies:

"The Ruling on the Sums Wrongly Transferred by (S.S.C) to the Deceased's Account" 

Date: 29/Jumada2/1437 AH, corresponding to 7/4/2016 AD

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of the Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

The Board reviewed the letter of the General Director of The Social Security Corporation (S.S.C), on the above date, which reads as follows:

Could your Grace clarify the ruling of Sharia as regards a bank declining from giving back the amounts transferred by the Corporation to the account of one of its beneficiaries after his death because it wasn`t notified about that, and how to divide those amounts among his heirs? It should be noted that the law stipulates ceasing the transfer of a person`s salary from the date of their death, and the Corporation should divide it among his heirs-if there were any - and in retroactive effect from that same date. Is it permissible for the bank to keep those salaries under the pretext that the heirs are entitled to them, or is it permissible for it to deduce the debts, due on the deceased, from those salaries, which aren`t considered the right of the deceased in the first place?

Having deliberated the above question, the Board decided the following: 

The Social Security System is among the public interests drawn up by contemporary laws in order to achieve security and stability for the working class of the Muslim community. Those benefits go under the umbrella of socio-cooperative insurance where contributions are made by the employee, the state and the Corporation. When the he/she becomes eligible to receive the benefits, they are granted to him/her as a donation.

The Corporation has the right to claim back the amounts that it has transferred to the beneficiary after his death because he isn`t entitled to receive them. Juristic principles have established the following: "A clearly wrong conjecture doesn`t count", and the eligibility to receive the above benefits is tied with the beneficiary being alive, if he/she isn`t, they become the right of the Corporation, to be given by it to the eligible recipients , as stipulated by the regulations observed in such situation.

In conclusion, the Corporation has the right to claim the amounts that it had transferred to the beneficiary`s account by mistake in order to dispose of them in line with the regulations of the Social Security. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of  the Iftaa` Board,

 Abdulkareem Khasawneh/Member

Vice chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Prof. Ahmad Hilayel/Member

Dr. Hayel Abduhafeez/Member

Prof. Abdulnaser Abulbasal/Member

Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi/Member

Dr. Yahia Albotoosh/Member

Prof. Abdullah Alfawaz/Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa

Dr. Mohammad Alzou`bi

Dr. Mohammad Alkhalayeleh/Member 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

My brother works in a conventional bank and gave me one of the gifts distributed to bank employees — what is the ruling on accepting it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to accepting such gifts, because the physical gift itself does not carry any inherent prohibition — unlike stolen property. Sin does not transfer or extend to the one who receives the gift, for Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "And no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [Al-Anʿām/164]
The evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ himself ate from the food of the Jews, conducted transactions with them, and purchased from them — and it is well known that their wealth was intermingled with ribā. Similarly, the wealth of conventional ribā-based banks is a mixture of the lawful and the unlawful.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is not forbidden to transact with one whose wealth is predominantly unlawful, nor to eat from it — as al-Nawawī affirmed in al-Majmūʿ." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 9/P.389] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on a Friday sermon in which the khaṭīb did not explicitly exhort the congregation to be conscious of Allah (taqwā) in both sermons, but sufficed with commanding them to obey Allah and refrain from disobeying Him?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
For the Friday sermon (khuṭbat al-Jumʿah) to be valid, certain essential pillars (arkān) must be fulfilled. Among these is the exhortation to be conscious of Allah (waṣiyyah bi-taqwā Allāh), which must be present in both sermons. Alongside this pillar, the praising of Allah (ḥamdallah) and the sending of blessings upon the Messenger of Allah ﷺ are equally required.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "These three are pillars in each of the two sermons, because each sermon is independent and separate from the other." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj,Vol.4/P.447]
It is not a condition that the exhortation be expressed in any specific wording, nor is it required that the word "taqwā" itself be used — such as saying "I exhort you to be conscious of Allah." Rather, this pillar is fulfilled by any expression that contains a command to obey Allah the Almighty and to abstain from what He has prohibited.
Imām al-Khaṭīb al-Sharbīnī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "The third pillar is the exhortation to taqwā... The specific wording of this exhortation is not required, according to the most correct view, because the purpose is admonition and the urging of obedience to Allah the Almighty. Therefore, any expression that conveys admonition suffices — whether long or short — such as: 'Obey Allah and be ever mindful of Him.'" [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj,Vol.1/P.550]
Accordingly, what the khaṭīb has done — by commanding obedience to Allah and forbidding disobedience to Him in both sermons — is valid and sufficient. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What are the legal and religious consequences for a charitable organization in the event that a sacrificial animal is damaged or spoiled after slaughter?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Charitable organizations entrusted with slaughtering sacrificial animals (uḍḥiyyah) and distributing their meat on behalf of their owners are obligated to safeguard the meat from spoilage, damage, theft, and any other harm. This is because such organizations act as agents (wukalā') on behalf of those offering the sacrifice, and an agent holds what is entrusted to them in trust (amānah) — whether they receive a wage for their work or act on a voluntary basis.
If the sacrificial animal is damaged after slaughter during the processes of packaging, transportation, or storage due to negligence or oversight — whether on the part of the organization's own staff overseeing the operation, or on the part of third parties contracted by the organization such as transport or shipping companies — then liability falls upon the negligent party, who is required to compensate for the value of the sacrifice. It is not permissible to cover such compensation from the organization's other donor funds.
However, if the damage to the sacrificial animal occurs without any negligence in its preservation and storage on the part of any party involved in the transportation, shipping, or storage process, and is instead attributable to force majeure circumstances beyond their control, then no financial liability is borne by any party in such a case. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for a husband to sell his wife`s jewelry if he was in a hard up?

A woman`s jewelry and dowry are her own property, and it is forbidden for the husband to take either without obtaining her approval. However, it is desirable for the wife to support her husband through considering her jewelry a sort of documented debt on him.

See More