By Ather Farouqui
March 3, 2012
The author has sent
the following article explaining the background of its evolution that reads:
“This article in its present form has evolved out of a previous one published
in EPW (May 7-13, 2011) as Commentary and an even earlier opinion piece that
appeared in The Times of India (July 28, 2008). While updating the present
article I undertook further research in this field by taking into account a
wide range of literature that has been published on the subject as well as the
final decision of the Kerala High Court (February 3, 2011) relating to the issue.
Also, since a commentary in a national daily has its limitations and specific
style and as considerable time has elapsed since its publication, the present
article varies a great deal from the commentary published in The Times of
India. The resultant essay, therefore, is a much expanded and detailed work.
Both advocates and opponents of Islamic banking may find flaws with my views,
which I welcome wholeheartedly keeping in mind the best traditions of democracy
in this country. I also hope that in keeping with the same spirit they will
accept the need for a debate on the issue and welcome my take on Islamic
banking as my attempt to understand and contribute to its literature.”
The debate relating to
the practical application of Islamic principles in the context of the modern
world and the current state of geopolitics is a vexed one for Muslims. Islamic
banking or Islamic finance is central to the enterprise of those within the
community who wish to wield power in the name of Islam and alienate Muslims from
the rest of the world. They certainly want to construct an imaginary Muslim
world not around any positive or constructive values, but rather around the
derogatory issue of Muslim bashing. The debate on Islamic banking, thus, is one
that brings the tension between Islamists and others quite nakedly to the fore.
In this tension, the everyday humiliation that the ordinary Muslim faces in the
current scenario, especially in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and growing
Islamic terror and its repercussions, helps Islamists consolidate their
arguments and forces.1 A writ petition filed in the Kerala High Court [W.P.©
No. 35180 of 2009–7 December, to be precise], and the court’s subsequent stay
order given on January 5, 20102 by the Chief Justice S.R. Bannurmath and
Justice Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan and the final judgment delivered by Chief
Justice J. Chelameswar and Justice P.R. Ramachandra Menon dismissing the
petition on February 3, 20113 has brought the issue of Islamic banking into
sharp focus, necessitating a public debate on its various aspects. In this
context, the proselytising efforts of certain religious organisations also
comes to mind, particularly due to their belligerent mission to propagate a
radical interpretation of Islam from which also stems their rejection of
conventional banking practices as Haram, implying that they are incongruous
with the tenets of Islam. This just forms part of their strategy to mobilise
more Muslims into their ranks. Politics always revolves around economics, which
explains the ploy of radical Islamic groups attempting to implement one or the
other model of Islamic banking as part of their agenda.
This particular case
started after the Kerala Government’s plan to set up India’s first Islamic
interest-free bank aiming to attract investors primarily from the Gulf. The
Kerala High Court’s stay order was a welcome intervention as it reiterated the
secular principles of the nation and halted, even if provisionally, the attempt
to introduce a system of banking favouring a particular community in a secular
state such as India. This came after a slew of arguments and counter-arguments
on the issue of Islamic banking, primary among which was the aforementioned
writ petition filed in public interest by former Union Law Minister Subrahmaniam
Swamy against the registration of the state owned Islamic finance company,
Kerala State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (KSIDC).4 His
objections were twofold—one, that such an interest-free Shariah-compliant
financial company was contradictory to the operating banking laws of the
country, and two, that “the Shariah is the canon law of Muslims. A financial
services company set up with government participation which would follow the
canon law of a particular religion is a clear instance of the state favouring a
particular religion.”5 This was challenged by a counter-affidavit filed by T.P.
Thomas Kutty, the then Deputy General Manager (Projects) of KSIDC on behalf of
the company, who aligned the establishment of such an institution to industrial
development in Kerala and alluded to targeting untapped Gulf money that could
only be invested in a Shariah-compliant bank. He remarked that “…mega projects
cannot be implemented without the required source of capital…” and in such a
scenario “it was decided to avail of funds from the huge unutilised funds in
Gulf countries and with Non-Resident Indians who are averse to collecting or
receiving interest on deposits or loans of any kind in accordance with Shariah
Principles followed by them”.6 The latter opinion had the underlying assumption
that investors, at least a section of foreign investors, need not comply with
the law of the land and that rather the law of the land would be bent to suit
such investors.
The final judgment,
nonetheless, went in favour of KSIDC: “… a division bench comprising Chief
Justice J. Chalameswar and Justice P.R. Ramachandra Menon dismissed petitions
objecting to the creation of an Islamic financial institution and said the
proposed body was to work in accordance with financial laws of the country even
while it complied with Shariah rules.”7 Further, “Dismissing the petition, the
court observed that although the institution was based on the principles of a
religion, its motive was not to propagate the religion and the state’s participation
in it was purely based on commercial prospects.”8 Most media reports welcomed
this with effusive, positive headlines as a step in the right direction after a
continued pro-Islamic banking struggle by Islamic scholars.
The problematic aspect
of this analysis is that the media has erred once again in over-simplifying the
matter assuming that all Muslims are in favour of introducing Islamic banking
in India and that the so-named ‘Islamic scholars’ are the true representatives
of the Islamic voice in the country if such a thing is at all possible. The
current state of geopolitics necessitates that we do not repeat the same
mistake of assuming that Muslims are an amorphous, ambiguous group represented
by self-appointed ‘scholars’ who proscribe to a radical and strict
interpretation of Islam completely subject to a Shariah-compliant way of life.
Liberal Muslims and members of the community, who ‘God’ forbid may have
divergent or even subversive views, are not even considered representatives,
let alone true representatives of the community and are left on the fringes by
the media which, on the contrary, gives ample voice to the radical wing of the
community.
A more impartial and
enlightened view of the community’s take on the issue and other issues can emerge
if the media and civil society alike make the effort to delve deeper into a
cross-section of Muslim opinion, subversive and submissive alike. The
community’s interests will be better served if the media takes notice of not
just the proclamations of self-appointed Islamic scholars but also the secular
voices, however subdued, scattered, unorganised and divided they may be.
Conversely, it is high time that these voices also come out in the open and
reiterate that the community and, at least, sections within the community are
willing to participate in the globalised economy as equal citizens and do not
want any concessions and mollycoddling to make this shift. Notwithstanding the
High Court’s decision, which can be viewed as an individual case at best, we
must not take this decision to be the final word on the broader issue of
introducing Islamic banking in India. In fact, civil society needs to reinforce
the nation’s secular values against any developmental initiative that has
religious overtones and cannot be beneficial in the long run.
The present article
deals with the issue of Islamic banking with special reference to the Indian
banking system and within the wider ambit of contemporary social realities. A
conscious attempt has been made to avoid confining the present argument to
merely Islamic principles vis-à-vis banking, which is usually the premise of
academic discussions on Islamic finance, in order to provide a broader and
alternative perspective of the issue.
My take on the issue
is informed by the goals and secular spirit of the Constitution of India and
not just its letter—which is interpreted by different vested interest groups as
and when the need arises. The state as a secular entity has always been
anathema to religious forces, notwithstanding those that particularly practice
politics in the name of Islam. Islamic political parties, for decades,
stridently opposed the word ‘secular’, misinterpreting it as atheism. This
raucous hatred of the word and its proponents was, however, toned down as a
political ploy in the 1980s when the Hindutva forces gained decisive strength
and the Islamic ones badly needed the support of secular voices. It is a
different debate altogether as to what extent this marriage of convenience
between the Islamist and secular forces, particularly the Left parties of late,
have damaged the cause and fibre of secularism and the formation of a healthy
civil society. By forging an alliance with Right-wing Islamic forces, the
secular enterprise has been unable to widen its appeal and has opened itself to
censure by other Right-wing forces.
•
TO return to the
central theme of my essay, the issue of interest-free banking is drawn from the
Qur’an, which prohibits levying interest. How-ever, it must be specified that
this prohibition applies to the practice of usury and not bank interest as we know
it now, as modern banking was, of course, unknown when Islam came into being.
The rationale behind the abhorrence of usury and of any business dealing solely
in money in Islam is based on the exploitative nature of such practices. The
rapacity of usurers and moneylenders in their dealings with borrowers has been
recorded throughout history and from all cultures of the world. Conversely,
usury was also exploited as one of the premises on which anti-Semitist
propaganda was built in the Western world, that contributed to the stereotyping
of the Jewish community and led to the holocaust. One therefore needs to
exercise caution before drawing parallels between usury and modern banking or
aligning any one community to a particular social or economic practice that can
extend into the common civic space.
In the modern
globalised economy, however, financiers and circulation of money play a very
important role, which have a wider reaching effect on social and political
factors as well. Switching from such a deep-rooted interest-based economy to an
interest-free one cannot be made prematurely and will no doubt inflict more
damage than can be fathomed. If today, however, any Muslim Government were to
provide a feasible paradigm and successfully introduce an interest-free economy
taking into consideration both social and political repercussions, it would
certainly lead to a new economic order. As of now, this is still an idyllic
dream.
Nonetheless, given the
Islamist propaganda against modern banking, the majority of Muslims, mainly
poor and lower middle class, who want to avail of modern banking facilities but
do not want to appear to be doing so, deposit their savings in a bank while
refusing to accept interest in the belief that they are conforming to the
dictates of Islam. According to a report published in the Journal of the
Reserve Bank of India (RBI), “it is reported that in India, thousands of crores
earned in interest is kept in suspended accounts, as believers do not claim
it…”9 A different aspect is brought to the fore in a 2009 article in the
Frontline on the fraught issue of Islamic banking: “Muslims constitute over 15
per cent of the population in India but they hold only 12 per cent of the
accounts in the 27 public sector banks…This financial exclusion could be
because of a certain mindset prevailing in the banking sector, which has
categorised Muslims and Muslim-dominated areas as ‘negative zones’ (this is
documented in the Sachar Report), and also for reasons of faith.”10 Whether
this exclusion of Muslims from the benefits of banking is a flaw of modern
banking or its misconstrued alignment with traditional usury is an open-ended
question, a problematic aspect of which remains the blanket rejection of
conventional banking by Islamists. This, the common gullible Muslim takes in
good faith to be true and avoids accepting the aforementioned interest and
thereby remains on the fence so to speak—s/he is neither the beneficiary of the
common economy nor, in the absence of any parallel Islamic bank, the recipient
of any profit shared with such a bank. The loser in all this, as can be
expected, is the ordinary Muslim citizen.
With the shift in
Muslim politics, the idea of promoting Islamic banking as a parallel to
conventional banking terming it as un-Islamic has emerged in recent years11 and
has further complicated the issue in the context of the Indian economic system
which is anyway full of contradictions. For a common Muslim, as a result of the
consistent propaganda, the interest-giving by banks is Haram, which is quite a
strong word in the Islamic vocabulary, and most Muslims, even the most modern
and educated, will, as a rule, abstain from committing Haram. This is often the
modus operandi of Islamists—exploiting the unwillingness of Muslims to commit Haram
and propagating the view that conventional banking is nothing but usury.12
Broadly speaking, in the modern Indian banking system, banks are financial
institutions that charge and pay interest in business dealings. Besides, modern
Indian banking is not just about interest; it is a tool for organising life in
many ways and there is no escape from it. In the common civic space every
citizen, including Muslims, whether directly or indirectly, is involved in
modern banking. The case of Islamic banking is a tricky one, even in the
context of Islamic nations. This will be clearer if one examines and enumerates
the banking policies of a few Islamic nations and their take on interest-free
banking.
Interestingly, in
Saudi Arabia too, banks, as part of the international economic system, are
involved in the practice of charging and paying interest. Saudi banks, however,
employ semantics and use the terms profit- and loss-sharing in place of
interest. Since banks in Saudi Arabia, an oil-rich economy, do not usually
suffer losses, the depositors share the profits as a matter of course, and it
is not considered riba (usury).
To state another
example, a few years ago, Islamists in Pakistan demanded an end to the
interest-paying system of banks. They lobbied against this with the result that
the Federal Shariat Court pronounced judgment in their favour but the
government did not pass it in the legislature. Later, the Appellate Bench of
the Supreme Court of Pakistan set the judgment aside and the matter is still
sub judice.13
Even in an Islamic
state such as Pakistan, therefore, interest-free banking has till date been
unsuccessful largely due to the lacunae in the existing system but also as a
result of the dichotomy between overemphasis on religious principles while
trying to find one’s place in a globalised market economy.
This can also be
discerned in nations such as Indonesia where leaders are cautious even as they
seek to move towards an economic system supposedly in keeping with Islamic
principles. Commenting on the Fifth World Islamic Economic Forum (WIFE) held in
Jakarta in March 2009, development economist Terry Lacey detects this concern
among Indonesian policymakers and commentators, “…participants and commentators
at the Jakarta Forum warned that Islamic banking and finance was a young
industry and had not yet been truly tried and tested…The Indonesian case
illustrates there is a global gap between aspirations for Islamic banking and
finance, and realities.”14
Within the Muslim
community of India, conventional and reformist approaches to Islam exist side
by side. The reformist approach is, of course, based on the compulsions of
modern life. According to eminent Muslim thinkers of the twentieth century
including Maulana Shibli Nomani and Allama Iqbal, 15 bank ‘interest’ is a profit
on investment or charge on capital and when it is not exploitative, it is not
riba. But both classical and contemporary Quranic commentaries, mainly of the
scholars whose followers comprise and propagate the atavistic school of
thought, popularly known as radical Islamists, are opposed to modern Islamic
banking and use the word riba as synonymous with interest.
•
WHILE in the oil-rich
economy of Saudi Arabia and even, in the ultimate analysis, in Pakistan, a
practical approach to the issue of interest is the majoritarian one, in India,
because of the educational backwardness of a large number of Indian Muslims,
the issue of bank interest has become a much-debated and polemical one. Against
this murkiness that is Islamic banking, unscrupulous Muslim shylocks, supported
by a section of the Muslim clergy, continue to operate in India and are able to
hoodwink Muslims in the name of Islamic or non-interest banking. Their
propaganda finds adequate support among those whose only agenda is to
promulgate everything as non-Islamic to justify and consolidate their positions
as self-proclaimed leaders of Muslims. Certainly in doing so they keep harking
back to archaic ideals that have no place in the contemporary world and are
contrary to the interests of Muslims in India The modus operandi of these
Islamic banking organisations is very simple and one can find these banks in
almost every locality where a substantive Muslim population exists.
These shylocks open
accounts in a nationalised bank and make huge deposits collected from poor
Muslims with small savings on the counters of the so-called Islamic banks. They
use their knowledge and skills of the banking system very shrewdly—depositing
80 per cent of the money in nationalised banks in different fixed deposits and
leaving hardly 20 per cent of the money in circulation—to profit from the
interest earned on the deposit of the collected sum.
The common investor,
who has entrusted his/her principal amount to the Muslim usurer, gets back
his/her original amount only when needed, little knowing that the interest from
his/her money is being used for the moneylender’s business plans. Whenever
these poor Muslims need money, the Islamic banks give them loans, with their
gold jewellery or land held as security or collateral, and charge interest,
calling it ‘service tax’ instead.
Thus, this banking
system not only makes money for its unscrupulous operators in the name of
Islamic banking but also excludes the Muslim community from actively
participating in the modern economy. This ploy systematically denies Muslims
the opportunity of availing the benefits of the uniform economic programme. A
large section of the community do not take bank loans—believing that giving or
taking interest is Haram—so their businesses do not flourish and they do not
progress while others, who negotiate on their behalf, continue to benefit from
their hard-earned money.
Sometimes it gets
murkier. Around fifteen years ago, one such dubious operation was introduced
calling it a model for Islamic banking. The enterprise offered three to four
times higher returns than other investments, proclaiming that investors would
be partners in the venture so whatever they will get as additional amount on
the principal investment will not be interest. This seemed the apocryphal
answer to the prayers of Muslims continually indoctrinated to believe that
conventional banking was Haram, and they went ahead and invested heavily
without realising that in a partnership venture you are liable for loss too if
the money is not invested intelligently or the investors do not possess sound
business acumen.
Although the venture
declared that the depositors were partners, their opinion was not sought while
investing their money in the share market, which is at best a high-risk
enterprise. Within two or three years the venture collapsed. The mullahs and
politicians got their money back, but the common Muslim investors, as is always
the case, were left without redress. Although lengthy legal proceedings are on
and are likely to carry on for the next 50 years or more, given the way the
Indian judicial system operates and given the fact that the money was collected
from all over the country. If the government and the RBI do not take stern
action against this kind of scandalous banking—that exists in almost every
locality where a considerable Muslim population resides, the shylocks of the community
will not allow Muslims to even join in the debate on the issue of modern
banking, far less avail of its benefits and participate in the mainstream economy.
And big scams of such nature will continue to flourish unabated.16
•
A very instructive
work on this issue is Muhammad Saleem’s Islamic Banking: A $300 Billion
Deception.17 In it, he discusses and evaluates the parallels and differences
between conventional banking and usury (riba) as defined by the Quran. He
explores the various Islamic banking products offered by Islamic banks and
tries to understand if they are indeed an improvement on the current
conventional banking ones.
According to him, in
mudaraba the entrepreneur gets funds from one or more investors and retains the
balance from profits but does not share losses;18 Musharaka is similar to
Mudaraba but differs in one aspect. In it, the entrepreneur is also a
contributor to the venture and shares the risks involved, which also means that
his share of the predetermined profits will be higher. From his observations
and experiences, the author estimates that not more than five per cent of the
Islamic bank assets are used on these two products although $300 billion assets
are controlled by Islamic banks in the present date.19
Murabaha, however,
involves the bank purchasing specified goods from a third party on behalf of
the clients and in turn selling the goods to the clients at the purchase price
with an agreed fixed profit margin added to it. But, according to Saleem, “In
theory it sounds reasonable and appears to be consistent with the principles of
Sharia. Certainly structure of these transactions meets the letter of the law.
However, whether they meet the spirit of the Sharia is another matter… Indeed
in practice unlike a real trading transaction, the banks purchase the commodity
or goods only after the customer has agreed in writing to purchase it from the
bank at a profit. The bank does not assume any risk… however gets a
predetermined fixed rate. This is clearly interest, concealed in Islamic garb
and therefore not conforming to the requirements of the Shariah, certainly not
the spirit of the Sharia.”20
In ijara, which he
equates with lease financing commonly practiced in the West, the bank purchases
equipment such as airplanes or machinery and rents it to clients for a set
period at an agreed rate, which takes into account the cost of equipment and
the time value of money, which is nothing but interest. So, according to
Saleem, although Islamic scholars term this as Shariah compliant by virtue of
the risk sharing involved in this product, in practice “the Islamic banks
require the equipment to be insured (with the insurance premiums to be paid by
the client) and banks, like their counterparts in the West also require that
the client put up some of the money—in practice financing no more than about 90
per cent of the cost of the equipment… The bottom line is that Islamic lease
financing is the same as practiced by the conventional banks with interest as
an integral part of the financing mechanism.”21
He concludes that
“proponents of Islamic banking need to make a choice: either they should come
up with a more moderate, less rigid and literal, and contemporary
interpretation of the Quranic verses concerning riba, or they must make the
Islamic banks conduct their business—without semantic gimmicks and tricks—truly
on the basis of profit and loss sharing basis (essentially venture capital,
mudaraba, and musharaka) and thus demonstrate and prove to the world that
Islamic banking is a workable banking system. They can’t have it both ways.”24
His view is, “Muslims should be prepared to debate this issue, not simply
accept judgments, fatwas, and views of religious scholars and Mullahs, many of
whom are blissfully unencumbered with any knowledge of Islamic history,
economics and banking.”23 In this he has put forth an important argument for
the need for an informed debate on the issue, which as of now many proponents
of Islamic banking do not encourage. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his
view, one cannot deny its value as an important contribution to the study of
Islamic banking, more so from a neutral and unbiased point of view.
The tussle of the
Muslim world versus others is mainly focused on financial recourses of the
former, particularly oil-rich countries, and the debate in India, a secular
state, is as vigorous as in many Muslim countries. For recent trends in the
debate one can find an inundation of reports and other discussions in Muslim
newspapers the world over with India being no exception. A leading daily of
Saudi Arabia, Arab News, devoted one full, ‘exclusive’ page to Islamic finance
with the leading story entitled “UK promotes city [London] as centre for global
Islamic finance” by Mushtak Parker.24 Terry Lacey’s aforementioned report at
the Fifth WIEF in Jakarta, Indonesia,25 is a recent example of the continuing
debate on the issue in Indian Muslim newspapers.
For the campaign
against mainstream banking amongst masses, a good amount of material is
regularly disseminated. The propagators of such campaigns have turned a blind
eye to the so-called Islamic banking prevailing in almost every locality with
substantive Muslim population simply because these banks help Islamists
consolidate their constituency with polarisation in the name of Islamic
banking.26 Financial institutions in India are commonly categorised as banks
and non-banking financial institutions. The definition of banking, as per the
Banking Regulation Act of 1949, is: “accepting, for the purpose of landing or
investment, of deposits of money from the public repayable on demand or
otherwise and withdrawable by cheque, drafts order or otherwise…”27 Banks in
India are governed by the Banking Regulation Act 1949, Reserve Bank of India
Act 1934, Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 and Cooperative Societies Act 1961.
The existence of the so-called Islamic banks is not covered under these Acts.
The RBI constituted a
Working Group in June 2005 comprising five members representing the Department
of Banking Operations and Development, Foreign Exchange Department, State Bank
of India, ICICI Bank Ltd. and Oman International Bank headed by Executive
Director Anand Sinha. This was an informal group and no formal terms of
reference were drawn up. In its five meetings, the Group concluded that “in the
current statutory and regulatory framework it would not be feasible for the
banks in India to undertake Islamic banking”28, though it made no specific recommendation
warranting any action by the RBI. A copy of the report was forwarded to the
Ministry of Finance in July 2007, which has not taken an action to the best of
public knowledge.
There is an urgent
need to revisit the feasibility of Islamic banking in India notwithstanding the
pressure of pro-Islamic banking lobbyists who are fast gaining credence here.
We should question whether such measures are indeed necessary in a secular
country such as India. Surely, introducing conditions favourable to any one community
can only be detrimental to the secular fabric of the nation? We should also
question whether appeasement is the best way to gain the confidence of a
community or a more proactive effort is in order to integrate Muslims into the
mainstream economy in order to make them long-term beneficiaries of India’s
economic growth. Such questions rather than bowing down to political pressure
and appeasement should inform the government’s future decisions on this
issue.29
FOOTNOTES
1. I have dwelled at length on this issue of
the modern Muslim identity caught in the problematic relationship between the
anti-Muslim propaganda of the West and the fundamentalist agenda of the
Islamists in my edited volume Muslims and Media Images (New Delhi: OUP, 2010).
2. V. R. Jayaraj, “HC stays LDF Govt’s
Islamic bank project”, The Pioneer, January 6, 2010, New Delhi, p. 7.
3. The Times of India and The Economic Times
on February 4, 2011 and Deccan Chronicle, February 5, 2011.
4. Dr. Subrahmaniam Swamy v. State of Kerala
represented by Chief Secretary and others, W.P. © No. 35180 of 2009, High Court
of Kerala, Ernakulam.
5. Ibid.
6. W.P. © No. 35180 of 2009, Counter
Affidavit filed on behalf of the Kerala State Industrial Development
Corporation Limited, the 3rd Respondent in the above petition, March 2010.
7. The Times of India, February 4, 2011, p.
1.
8. Ibid., p. 28.
9. Binda Vasu,
“Islamic Banking—Banking For A Change”, RBI Legal News and Views–Journal
Section, vol. 10, no. 2, April-June 2005
10. Purnima S. Tripathi, “Inclusive Banking”,
Frontline, vol. 26, no. 21, October 10-23, 2009.
11. Most pro-Islamic banking lobbyists in
India, in a bid to further their cause, often draw parallels with the major
inroads achieved by other (read secular) nations as far as Islamic banking is
concerned. Major among these are the regulations and studies done by the UK,
Singapore, Hong Kong, France and Japan. Whether the same can be feasible or
applicable in the case of a country as diverse and sensitive as India remains
to be seen. For further details see: The Development of Islamic Finance in the
UK: The Government’s Perspective, (London: HM Treasury, December 2008); Michael
Ainley et al, Islamic Finance in the UK: Regulation and Challenges, [London:
Financial Services Authority (FSA), November 2007]; Juan Solé, “Introducing
Islamic Banks into Conventional Banking Systems”, IMF Working Paper WP/07/175,
(Washington: International Monetary Fund, July 2007); Chia Der Jiun and Wang
Yining, “Risks and Regulations of Islamic Banks: A Perspective from a
Non-Islamic Jurisdiction”, MAS Staff Paper No. 49, (Singapore: Prudential
Policy Department, Monetary Authority of Singapore, December 2008); Islamic
Finance Regulations in Non-OIC Jurisdictions, Case Studies of the UK,
Singapore, Hong Kong, France, Japan (London: Lovells, November 2009).
12. Salman Khurshid, Congress MP and Minister
for Minority Affairs and Law and Justice, explains this in a recent interview,
“In India, the discussion on Islamic banking is limited mostly to the issue of
interest, which is termed as Haram, though reforms in the banking sector have
gone far beyond the issue of the word ‘interest’ in a narrow sense. This debate
has been initiated and sustained by those who subscribe to the concept of
‘pan-Islamic mobilisation’. Interestingly, the debate ignores the existence of
a number of Muslim dominated banks which are charging interest. Such banks can
be found in all cities where Muslim population is substantial. Islamic banking
in India would require an amendment to the Banking Regulation Act, which is not
possible unless there is consensus on this idea in a secular country like ours.
So, unless Islamic banking provides answers to all the questions, people will
not buy the argument for Islamic banking in the present context. For Islamic
banking to adjust with the prevalent banking system in India is a very
difficult task. But for a healthy democracy, we have to debate every public
idea and by debating the issue of Islamic banking we are also involving Muslim
ideological groups in the democratic process. For me, this is a positive sign
as we should welcome any idea that strengthens democracy.” (Salman
Khurshid’s interview with Yogi Sikand, July 12, 2011, available at
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/saldw…, last accessed on July 29, 2011)
13. In a judgment (PLD 2000 SC 225) of
Pakistan’s Supreme Court, it was held that the country’s current interest-based
system needs to be replaced with one that is Shariah compliant. However, in a
review (PLD 2002 SC 801) this judgment was suspended and was forwarded to the
Federal Shariat Court for reconsideration, a matter that is still pending. The
main issue seems to be that Pakistan, unlike Saudi Arabia, is not oil-rich and
is dependent on international aid like its many other third-world counter-parts.
So while seeking to replace an interest-based economy with a Shariah-compliant
one may be deemed feasible by the Ulema, it is rendered pragmatically
impossible, at least in the foreseeable future, by Pakistan’s current state of
indebtedness to international aid, which is of course interest-based. Justice
Wajihuddin Ahmed clearly spells this out in PLD 2000 SC 780–1:
“12. That, as is
widely known, Pakistan’s obligations to foreign Governments and international
agencies run into billions of dollars. These obligations have to be serviced by
periodical repayments on a continuing basis. Since the present condition of the
national economy is not such that these repayments can be made out of the
Government’s own resources, further assistance is sought internationally by the
Government for the discharge of its contractual and legal obligations. Thus,
every year further loans are taken from foreign Governments and international
agencies to enable the Government to repay loans which have been taken in the past.
In the event that the Government defaults in the discharge of its obligations,
the result will be:
Firstly, that Pakistan
will be declared as a defaulter in international markets.
Secondly, Pakistan
will not be able to obtain any further foreign loan or credit.
Thirdly, not merely
foreign Governments and international lending agencies will refuse to extend
credit facilities to the Government but even foreign commercial banks will
refuse to advance any money to the Government.
Fourthly, letters of
credit which are opened by Pakistani Banks to enable the import of goods will
no longer be acceptable abroad. In consequence, the import of goods into the
country will be drastically, and perhaps critically, reduced. In particular,
this would have a direct impact and bearing on the import of wheat, edible oil,
petroleum and oil, as well as other commodities.
Fifthly, quite apart
from the adverse impact on the Government, commercial and industrial companies
operating in Pakistan would find it almost impossible to import capital goods
and machinery for further industralisation (sic) of the country. Similarly, the
import of raw materials to allow the continued functioning of plants and
factories in the country would be adversely affected.”
14. Terry Lacey, “Islamic Finance in a Changing
World”, The Milli Gazette, vol. 10, no. 6, March 16-31, 2009.
15. In a letter dated January 17, 1932 to
Khwaja Abdur Raheem, Allama Iqbal writes, “Interest in every form is
prohibited. But this is so in an ideal society. Fatwa of Shah Abdul Azeez is
that to draw bank interest is permissible.” [B.A. Dar (ed.), Anwaare-Iqbal
(Karachi: 1967), p. 245 (publication house not known)]
16. This is not a singular case; several other
such operations have and continue to function exploiting the Indian Muslim’s
willingness to invest money in an Islamic way. See The Milli Gazette, vol. 1,
no. 12, July 1-15, 2000, available at http://www.milligazette.com/Archive…, and
vol. 5, no. 9, May 1-15, 2004, available at
http://www.milligazette.com/Archive…, last accessed on January 18, 2011.
17. Muhammad Saleem, Islamic Banking: A $300
Billion Deception, Observations and Arguments on Riba (interest or usury),
Islamic Banking Practices, Venture Capital and Enlightenment (Bloomington,
Indiana: Xlibris, 2005)
18. Ibid., p. 21.
19. Ibid., p. 22.
20. Ibid., p. 23.
21. Ibid., p. 25-6.
22. Ibid., p. 69.
23. Ibid., p. 7.
24. “Islamic Finance”, Arab News, April 27,
2009, Jeddah, Riyadh and Dammam.
25. Lacey, “Islamic Finance in a Changing
World”.
26. For the extreme orthodox interpretation of
the concept of riba, usury and interest, see M. Umer Chapra, Prohibition of
Interest: Does it Make Sense?(New Delhi: Markazi Maktaba Islami Publishers, 2005)
27. http://www.bankingindiaupdate.com/b…,
last accessed on January 18, 2011
28. Quoted in the Reserve Bank of India’s
January 30, 2009 response to H. Abdur Raqeeb, The Right to Information Act,
2005–Query, Ref. No: RIA.1547/2008–2009.
29. I gratefully acknowledge the contribution
of Yasmin Rahman in helping me out while revising the final draft of the
article.
The author is a
pioneer scholar in the field of Urdu language and its education and has for
long been arguing that instead of modernising dini Madarsas, the government
should provide Urdu education as part of the secular curriculum of school
education. He has written his M. Phil and Ph. D dissertations from Jawaharlal
Nehru University, New Delhi. His recent book, Muslims and Media Images, (OUP
2009) presents a frank and no-holds-barred discussion on an important theme
that has become a victim of oversimplification. The paperback edition (2010) of
the author’s book, Redefining Urdu Politics in India, with a new Introduction
argues how the once-secular Urdu language has now been relegated to only
Muslims and confined within the realm of Madarsas. It is a timely intervention
in the wake of the Right to Education Act, 2010. He can be contacted at e-mail:
farouqui@yahoo.com
Source: Mainstream
Weekly
URL: http://www.bankingindiaupdate.com/b…, last
accessed on January 18, 2011
28. Quoted in the Reserve Bank of India’s
January 30, 2009 response to H. Abdur Raqeeb, The Right to Information Act,
2005–Query, Ref. No: RIA.1547/2008–2009.
29. I gratefully acknowledge the contribution
of Yasmin Rahman in helping me out while revising the final draft of the
article.
The author is a
pioneer scholar in the field of Urdu language and its education and has for
long been arguing that instead of modernising dini Madarsas, the government
should provide Urdu education as part of the secular curriculum of school
education. He has written his M. Phil and Ph. D dissertations from Jawaharlal
Nehru University, New Delhi. His recent book, Muslims and Media Images, (OUP
2009) presents a frank and no-holds-barred discussion on an important theme
that has become a victim of oversimplification. The paperback edition (2010) of
the author’s book, Redefining Urdu Politics in India, with a new Introduction
argues how the once-secular Urdu language has now been relegated to only
Muslims and confined within the realm of Madarsas. It is a timely intervention
in the wake of the Right to Education Act, 2010. He can be contacted at e-mail:
farouqui@yahoo.com
Source: Mainstream Weekly
URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/islamic-banking-india-service-pan/d/6813