عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(9): “Ruling on the Amendments over the Moqarada Bonds Act“

Date Added : 25-01-2018

 

Resolution No.(9) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:  

“Ruling on the Amendments over the Moqarada Bonds Act“

Date: 29/5/1407 AH, 29/1/1987 AD.

 

Question: What is the ruling on the amendments over the Moqarada (A borrowing tool in favor of a company bonds act?
Answer: All perfect praise is due to Allah, The Lord of the Worlds.
After reviewing the articles of the interim, act no. (10), 1981, the proposed amendments and deliberating over them, the Board has decided the following:
A- Confirming the resolution of the Iftaa` Committee issued on the 8th of Feb. 1398 AH, 17/1/1978 on Moqarada draft-act and that its texts and sections comply with the rulings of Islamic Sharia.
B- Confirming the resolution of the Iftaa` Committee issued on the 8th of Feb. 1398 AH, 17/1/1978 on the permissibility of the government`s guarantee over settling the par value of Moqarada bonds within the specified dates since the government is considered a Third Party, and enjoys the general authorities in doing what is in the best interest of its citizens.
C- The Board noticed that the 12th article of the interim act No.(10),1981  has added-after stating that the government guarantees settling the whole due par value of the Moqarada bonds within the specified dates-that the amounts paid by the government  in this case are considered a zero-interest loan to the project, and becomes due once the bonds are totally settled. In other words, the government isn`t a Third Party anymore because the project itself has settled all the payments. In fact, the project borrowed from the government because it didn`t have the amount needed for settling the par value of the bonds. This is a kind of guarantee against loss given by the owner of the money from the Mudarib (co-partner) in a Mudaraba (co-partnership) contract, and this contradicts the rulings of a Mudaraba contract stipulated in Islamic Jurisprudence.
Therefore, the board believes that it is essential for the government to continue its guarantee role as a Third Party. This in order to avoid stipulating that subscribers shall endure any loss-as stated by the Iftaa` Committee in the aforementioned resolution-and consequently this transaction becomes acceptable in Sharia.
Therefore, the Board views that it is essential that article (12) ends with the words: “specified dates”, and that what comes after them is omitted. Actually, Waqf(religious endowment) projects, projects undertaken by municipalities and  financially as well as managerially independent organizations  from which this guarantee  shall benefit are amongst the vital projects that target the best interest of the citizens. The government is keen on holding such projects and promoting them in order to achieve eco-social development so long as there are sufficient guarantees, which secure their proper progress and supervision.
The government`s guarantee over settling these bonds within the specified dates entails no harm, or squander of public funds, rather, it is using them positively in rare cases and exceptional situations.
D- The Board has reviewed the proposed amendments included in the note attached with the official letter of the Minister in question and believes that they don`t contradict the rulings of Sharia in this regard and that it (Board) doesn`t object including them in the interim act. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on working in the construction project of an Islamic bank`s administration building?

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions  There is no sin in working for the bank that declares compliance with the rulings of Sharia, in addition to adhering to the rulings of the supervising Sharia committee in the bank itself. This is provided that the committee consists of righteous, trustworthy, specialized scholars. And Allah The Almighty Knows Best.

Is performing Umrah an obligation for who is capable. Is he accountable for not performing it in this case?

Umrah is an obligation once in a lifetime for every Muslim. When physical and financial ability is present, it is preferable to perform Umrah, as well as Hajj. If one can afford to perform Umrah but not Hajj, then they should begin with Umrah, especially since Hajj nowadays is not accessible to everyone who wishes to perform it. In contrast, Umrah is more open and easier to undertake. And Allah knows best.
 
 
 
 
 

I am a wholesale gold trader. My clients are retail gold shop owners. I sell them gold jewelry and ornaments on credit, and they repay me in weekly installments over a period of two months or more. The payments are made in cash for the labor charges and for the gold they owe me. In return, they may give me either cash or used gold.
 

It is not permissible to sell gold or silver on an installment basis or with a deferred payment; rather, immediate exchange is required. The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: "Gold for gold, silver for silver, wheat for wheat, barley for barley, dates for dates, and salt for salt, like for like, hand to hand. Whoever gives more or asks for more has engaged in usury; the giver and receiver are the same in this regard." (Muslim). Additionally, the weight of the gold must be equal when exchanging new for used; otherwise, it involves usury. The solution is to buy the used gold with cash, then sell the new gold for cash as well. However, payment must be made at the time of the transaction in both cases. Alternatively, one could take the used gold with the intention of refining it, reshape it into a new form, or repair it, then take a fee for the workmanship or repair. And Allah Knows Best

My husband wanted to sell a piece of land that was his own, but his father insisted that he transfer the land in his (the father’s) name so that he could sell it at a higher price. Then, my husband and his father would split the price. After my father-in-law sold the land, he denied everything and refused to acknowledge my husband’s right. My father-in-law passed away a year ago, and my husband’s brothers divided the inheritance, refusing to acknowledge that this land was a trust held by their father for my husband until it was sold. Are they sinful for knowingly denying that the land belongs to my husband, and what is the ruling on praying against them?
 
 
 
 
 

All perfect praise be to Alalh, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His Peace and Blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all of his family and companions.
Among the rights of the deceased upon their heirs are: preparing them for burial at death, settling their debts, returning people’s rights to them, executing their will, and then dividing their estate. What was mentioned in the question falls under the rights of others, even if they are among the heirs, and the deceased is not absolved of it unless it is returned to its rightful owners. This is because Allah, Almighty, forbids consuming others' wealth/properties unjustly. However, do not give up on seeking a solution by involving righteous and well - respected individuals who may have influence over them, in the hope that Allah guides them to goodness and correctness. As for supplicating against them, the prayer of the oppressed is not rejected, even if the oppressed person is not a Muslim. And Allah knows best.
 
 
 
 
 

See More