عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(196): "The Permissibility of Levying Administrative Fees for the Loans Taken from the Governorates Development Fund"

Date Added : 25-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(196)(5/2014) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"The Permissibility of Levying Administrative Fees for the Loans Taken from the Governorates Development Fund"

Date: 17/Rabee` Al-Awal/1435 AH, corresponding to 17/2/2014.

 

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

On the above date, the Board reviewed the letter of the Jordan Enterprise Development Corporation, which reads as follows:

The Governorates Development Fund offers financing through an interest-free loan (Hassan), up to (70%) from the overall cost of the enterprise. The loanee is required to repay in installments over a period of eight years, including a two-year grace period. This is in order to re-use that same amount for financing new enterprises to benefit as many individuals as possible. Moreover, up to (10%) of the enterprise`s profit is deducted in case a profit was produced so as to protect the capital of the Fund to guarantee its continuity, because it is usually used for re-loaning, and no profits are redistributed, or given back to the government. In case of loss, the installments of the interest-free loan are to be repaid, without adding any interest, or profit, and it is possible to delay repayment if the loanee is in a hard up and after examining the reasons for his loss. Based on the afore-said, what is the ruling of Sharia as regards this financing mechanism adopted by the Jordan Enterprise Development Corporation?

After researching and deliberating, the Board decided what follows:

Offering loans to owners of small businesses is an accepted act of charity. It achieves comprehensive development, uproots poverty, increases individual productivity, and helps develop the areas where these enterprises are established.

Therefore, the financing mechanism adopted in the above question is an instance of clear Riba (usury) which has been prohibited by Allah, The Almighty, and His Messenger. It is impermissible for the above Fund to receive a percentage from the profits of the enterprises it finances. However, it is permissible to calculate the actual costs of offering these loans and collecting them, such as salaries of employees, paperwork, rent.. etc. but without the smallest addition, and this could be achieved through imposing a fixed amount of administrative fees. These shouldn`t be tied with the loan`s repayment period, or the enterprise`s profit; rather, they should be tied with the costs necessary for securing the continuity of the Fund, without making any profit by the loaning party. In fact, the Jordan Iftaa` Department, the accredited Fiqh assemblies, and the religious institutions have issued many Facosststwas that permit charging the loanee for the administrative fees of the loan since we believe that it  is the most suitable solution from the perspective of Islamic Sharia. We pray that Allah, The Exalted, Favors us and the Fund`s administrative board with success in serving the community and that their business remains within the boundaries of what is lawful. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, The Mufti General of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh.

Prof. Hayel Abdulhafeez/ Member

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Prof. Mohammad Al-Qudat/ Member

Prof. Abduln`nassir Abu Al Bass`al/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

Dr.Wasif Al-Bak`kri/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the Islamic ruling on smearing the head of the newborn with the blood of the `Aqiqah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is disliked (makrūh) to smear the head of the newborn with the blood of the 'aqīqah, as this is a practice that belongs to the customs of the pre-Islamic era of ignorance (Jāhiliyyah). What is Sunnah instead is to anoint the newborn's head with saffron or another pleasant fragrance. And Allah Almighty knows best.

I vowed to give a specific charity if a certain matter came to pass — what is the ruling on giving that charity before the matter is realised?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Fulfilling a vow (nadhr) is obligatory, in accordance with the word of Allah the Almighty: "And let them fulfil their vows." [Al-Ḥajj/ 29] And the saying of our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: "Whoever vows to obey Allah, let him obey Him; and whoever vows to disobey Him, let him not disobey Him." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
The Shāfiʿī scholars distinguished between a financial vow (nadhr mālī) and a bodily vow (nadhr badanī). They permitted the fulfilment of a financial vow to be brought forward — before the stipulated condition is met — but did not permit the same for a bodily vow, which may only be fulfilled after the condition has actually been realised.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is permissible to bring forward the fulfilment of a financial vow before the condition stipulated in it is met — such as saying: 'If I am healed, I vow to free a slave' or 'to give such-and-such in charity' — just as it is permissible to pay zakāh in advance. This is unlike a bodily vow, such as fasting." [Asnā al-Maṭālib, vol. 4/P.246]
Imām al-Bājūrī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Like expiation other than fasting, a financial vow — such as saying: 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave for the sake of Allah,' or 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave on the Friday following the recovery' — it is permissible to bring it forward before the recovery in the first case, and before the Friday following the recovery in the second case." [Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim, Vol.2/P.596] 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 is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

See More