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

What is the ruling on selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) described with specific attributes and authorizing an agent to slaughter them?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Selling sacrificial animals (udhiyah) that are described with specific attributes is permissible. This falls under the category of a salam sale (forward sale) if conducted using the terminology of salam, and under the category of a regular sale if not using the terminology of salam.
 
As for authorizing the seller to slaughter the sacrificial animal, the basic principle is that it is permissible, because the agent (wakil) stands in the place of the principal (muwakkil) in achieving his objective. This is a contract that the principal (the buyer) is entitled to perform himself, so authorizing another (the seller) to do so on his behalf is valid.
 
However, it is a condition for authorization to slaughter that the intention (niyyah) is present either at the time of slaughter or at the time of handing over the sacrificial animal to the agent. The basic principle is that the sacrificial animal must be specifically designated, as it is an act of worship. It is not required to designate it at the time of slaughter; rather, it is valid to do so before that.
 
It is permissible for the principal either to delegate the intention to the agent or to formulate it himself when authorizing the agent to slaughter. However, the sacrificial animal must be designated, even if at the time of slaughter, by the agent.
 
It is obligatory to designate the sacrificial animals so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own specific animal. Therefore, charitable organizations and companies must take this into consideration and establish a specific mechanism that ensures no mixing of sacrificial animals occurs, so that each person offering a sacrifice receives his own designated animal. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on the ablution of one from whom blood exits from his nose or a wound?

Blood flowing from a wound or a nosebleed does not invalidate ablution. However, performing ablution is recommended to avoid scholarly disagreement with those who make ablution obligatory after blood flows. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Does swallowing a fly, road dust, or flour dust break the fast?

A fasting person does not break their fast if something enters their body cavity against their will, such as a fly, road dust, or flour dust.

What is the ruling on the cessation of blood after (40) days from delivery, but later continued sporadically during two days of Ramadan?

Once postpartum bleeding (Nifas) ceases, and the woman is certain that it won`t reoccur, then she becomes ritually pure and so she is free to make Ghusl (purificatory bath), pray, and fast. If the bleeding reoccurs before fifteen days from its cessation, and before the end of (60) days after delivery, then the ruling on postpartum bleeding is effective, and her fasting and prayer are null and void, thus she must make up the fasting that she missed and not the prayer during those particular days.

See More