Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Saturday, January 26, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version Print | Comments |

Document Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance

by The Globe and Mail

Thanks to Dd Fd for the link.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080125.wcomment0125/BNStory/National/home

Banks are helping sharia make a back-door entrance

TAREK FATAH

It seems only yesterday that Premier Dalton McGuinty declared: "There will be no sharia law in Ontario." Many of us, who witnessed the medieval nature of manmade sharia laws in our countries of birth, heaved a sigh of relief back in September of 2005. We thought this was the end of the attempt by Islamists to sneak sharia into a Western jurisdiction. We were wrong.

The campaign to introduce sharia is back. Last time, the campaign took a populist approach, invoking multiculturalism. This time, the pro-sharia lobby is dangling the carrot of new niche markets and has the backing of Canada's major banks. Such icons of the corporate world as Citibank NA, HSBC Holdings PLC, and Barclays PLC have endorsed sharia banking and have started offering Islamic financing products to a vulnerable Muslim population.

In May, 2007, The Globe reported that "Several Canadian financial institutions are preparing sharia-compliant mortgages, insurance, taxi licensing and investment funds to help serve the country's fastest-growing part of the population." Recently, the Toronto Star's business section reported that an unnamed bank may offer sharia loans as early as this summer; Le Journal de Montreal disclosed that Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation(CMHC) was also getting in on the act. Stephanie Rubec, spokesperson for the CMHC, said the Crown corporation had launched a tender worth $100,000 to study Islamic mortgages for Muslim Canadians. Could she be oblivious to the fact that almost all Muslim Canadians currently have home mortgages through banks and don't feel they are living in sin? In fact, CMHC has gone a step further: It has quietly entered into a partnership with a Saudi company, AaYaan Holdings, to develop sharia-compliant mortgage-lending systems.

The origin of Islamic banking has its roots in the 1920s, but did not start until the late 1970s and owes much of its foundation to the Islamist doctrine of two people — Abul Ala Maudoodi of the Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan and Hassan al-Banna of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. The theory was put into practice by Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul-Haq who established sharia banking law in Pakistan.

Proponents of sharia banking rest their case on many verses of the Holy Koran that outlaw usury, not interest.

Verses that address the question of loans and debts include:

Al Baqarah (2:275): God hath permitted trade and forbidden usury;

Al Baqarah (2:276): Allah does not bless usury, and He causes charitable deeds to prosper, and Allah does not love any ungrateful sinner.

Every English-language translation of the Koran has translated the Arabic word riba as usury, not interest. Yet, Islamists have deliberately portrayed bank interest as usury and labelled the current banking system as un-Islamic. Instead, these Islamists have created exotic products with names that are foreign to much of the world's Muslim population. This is where they mask interest under the niqab of Mudraba, Musharaka, Murabaha, and Ijara. Two authors, both senior Muslim bankers, have written scathing critiques of sharia banking, one labelling the practice as nothing more than "deception," with the other suggesting the entire exercise was "a convenient pretext for advancing broad Islamic objectives and for lining the pockets of religious officials." Why Canadian banks would contribute to this masquerade is a question for ordinary Canadians to ask.

Muhammad Saleem is a former president and CEO of Park Avenue Bank in New York. Prior to that, he was a senior banker with Bankers Trust where, among other responsibilities, he headed the Middle East division and served as adviser to a prominent Islamic bank based in Bahrain. In his book, Islamic Banking — A $300 Billion Deception, Mr. Saleem not only dismisses the founding premise of sharia and Islamic banking, he says, "Islamic banks do not practise what they preach: they all charge interest, but disguised in Islamic garb. Thus they engage in deceptive and dishonest banking practises."

Another expert, Timur Kuran, who taught Islamic Thought at the University of Southern California, mocks the very idea. In his book, Islam and Mammon: The Economic Predicaments of Islamism, Prof. Kuran writes that the effort to introduce sharia banking "has promoted the spread of anti-modern currents of thought all across the Islamic world. It has also fostered an environment conducive to Islamist militancy."

Dozens of Islamic scholars and imams now serve on sharia boards of the banking industry. Moreover, a new industry of Islamic banking conferences and forums has emerged, permitting hundreds of sharia scholars to mix and mingle with bankers and economists at financial centres around the globe. In the words of Mr. Saleem, who attended many such meetings, they gather "to hear each other praise each other for all the innovations they are making." He gives examples of how sharia scholars only care for the money they get from banks, willing to rubberstamp any deal where interest is masked.

No sooner had CMHC announced its plans to study sharia-compliant mortgages, than an imam from Montreal's Noor Al Islam mosque offered his services to Canada's banks, claiming Muslims are averse to conventional mortgages because "it goes against their beliefs," a claim that would not withstand the slightest scrutiny.

Other academics who have studied the phenomenon have reached similar conclusions. Two New Zealand business professors, Beng Soon Chong and Ming-Hua Liu of Auckland University, in an October, 2007, study on the growth of Islamic banking in Malaysia, wrote: "Only a negligible portion of Islamic bank financing is strictly 'profit-and-loss sharing' based. … Our study, however, provides new evidence, which shows that, in practice, Islamic deposits are not interest-free." They concluded that the rapid growth in Islamic banking was "largely driven by the Islamic resurgence worldwide."

In the name of Islam, deception and dishonesty is being practised while ordinary Muslims are being made to feel that their interaction with mainstream banks is un-Islamic and sinful. As Mr. Saleem asks, "If Islamic banks label their hamburger a Mecca Burger, as long as it still has the same ingredients as a McDonald's burger, is it really any different in substance?"

Tarek Fatah is the author of Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State, to be published in March.

Comments 1 - 50 of 51 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #116302 by Animavore on January 26, 2008 at 8:14 am

 avatarIt may sound on the face of it like hate speech but, if you can't live by the laws of the country you're in; feck off back to the Middle East. And if we do grant muslims sharia law (and i hope to spagetti monster the people in power are not that thick) where does it end? We'll have every one demanding they're own tailor made laws. Also how would the laws affect people who grow up and abandon their religion or people who join in from another religion? It'll get very messy very quickly.

Other Comments by Animavore

2. Comment #116303 by PrimeNumbers on January 26, 2008 at 8:14 am

 avatarI fail to see the need to bend over backwards to Muslims, of which this is yet another example of.

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

3. Comment #116307 by digitalia on January 26, 2008 at 8:25 am

 avatarI can see the need from the point of view of businesses and politicians in Canada where the Muslim population is the fastest growing demographic. this chunk of the population needs to be catered to, and I believe the numbers show that they do enjoy the voting side of democracy.

Other Comments by digitalia

4. Comment #116308 by PrimeNumbers on January 26, 2008 at 8:28 am

 avatarThey might be fast growing, but unless they keep their private beliefs private, which is where all bad habits belong, they're going to become even more unpopular. Canadians are too tolerant by far, and Muslims about the least tolerant religion their is = culture clash.

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

5. Comment #116309 by drcancerman on January 26, 2008 at 8:28 am

 avatar
people who grow up and abandon their religion or people who join in from another religion?


According to sharia law, it will happen one of the 2, die, or be killed for converting, or will end up without rights, living in a prosecuted situation and neighbours or the chance to keep living but anyone that comes close are a potential killer, since the individual has no rights and should be killed.

Other Comments by drcancerman

6. Comment #116310 by Chris Bell on January 26, 2008 at 8:29 am

I'm not sure that I see the problem. Private institutions (banks) are designing a product to cater to the Muslim population. No laws are being passed.

I may not like it because I think it needlessly separates and alienates Muslims from mainstream culture. If that is all the article is saying, then I agree. The first sentence of the article seems out of place then.

Other Comments by Chris Bell

7. Comment #116311 by drcancerman on January 26, 2008 at 8:30 am

 avatarPrimeNumber

I Agree 100% with what you said!
Islam is so "tolerant" that a movie about women suffering under the law of islam manage to make its director dead.

Other Comments by drcancerman

8. Comment #116316 by kraut on January 26, 2008 at 8:38 am

 avatarThus they engage in deceptive and dishonest banking practises."



I thought "deceptive and dishonest" was the premise of any religion.
So two deceptive and dishonest practitioners join hands - money marketeers and the priests. A beautiful combination to behold. I just wonder - when will we see the first "sharia" based banker dangling from a bridge?

Other Comments by kraut

9. Comment #116317 by weel on January 26, 2008 at 8:40 am

PrimeNumbers,

"I fail to see the need to bend over backwards to Muslims"

But the bank doesn't; it is not a government or a political movement leaning one way or another, it is simply a profit-making corporation catering to what it perceives as the wishes of some of its customers. Now you and I may think it is pretty silly for people (1) to expect a bank to follow rules that are many centuries old and pre-date modern finance, and (2) to expect banking to be possible without something that is effectively similar to interest, and (3) to believe that by some clever clerically approved accounting manipulations unholy interest can be transformed into halal sharing of profit.

But it's not the bank's fault that its customers demand what they demand any more than it is a furniture store's fault if its customers demand fake antique chairs made of dark-brown stained pine that are soooo two decades ago, or a hairdresser's fault if customers insist on a Maggie Thatcher hairdo.

Other Comments by weel

10. Comment #116321 by digitalia on January 26, 2008 at 8:46 am

 avatar...yeah, what weel said :) (outlined what i was trying to say better than i could)

also take that same statement, replace "banks" or "corporations" with "politicians", and "profits" with "votes" - although those last two are almost synonyms nowadays!

gotta think Bottom-Line people, not what's "good", "just" or "right". question motives not morality.

Other Comments by digitalia

11. Comment #116327 by drcancerman on January 26, 2008 at 8:52 am

 avatardigitalia and weel

So at the end you two will support a sharia law in a country? So, not to angry our muslims masters we should put sharia law instead of a constitution?

Even though that is not what you two said, but little by little that is what, at end will be.


So you support as well, making the selling of pork meat illegal??(We know that muslims masters hate pork meat...we should cater their needs, since financially speaking they are great!)

Other Comments by drcancerman

12. Comment #116333 by liberalartist on January 26, 2008 at 8:58 am

 avatarSounds to me that this is a corrupting way to bank and banks do fall under a lot of regulations and rules, so I see a problem with it. 'Deceptive' does not belong in banking or we are all in trouble. This is not just a simple matter of catering to the clientele, especially since the clientele didn't seem to be complaining.

And what if the chinese in Canada suddenly demanded communist banking practices - people would be up in arm! But Islam is a religion so everyone is afraid to be against it and be politically incorrect. But Islam is not just a religion, it is also a political state and should be opposed because it goes against democracy.

Other Comments by liberalartist

13. Comment #116336 by digitalia on January 26, 2008 at 9:04 am

 avatarwow, cancerman, you need to take a toke of that joint in your avatar. :)

i won't speak for weel (i'm not going to assume to know what someone believes based on one post on a website) but i'm just trying to point to the more direct cause of this potential shift in financial philosophies. i don't think it's enough to point at something and says "it's bad" without attempting to understand the root causes and hard facts behind such a movement - regardless of whether this Web-exclusive comment from Globe's site is properly researched or just prematurely throwing up a caution flag.

points being:
1) Muslim population in Canada is rising faster than most other segments of the population.
2) Banks and Politicians ARE going to cater to them.

it's up to the more informed among us to look at ways such movements can be combated.

Other Comments by digitalia

14. Comment #116346 by digitalia on January 26, 2008 at 9:28 am

 avatar...however, reading the comments on this article at the Globe's site I think his real issue is the fact that unknowing MUSLIMS will be the victims here. maybe this falls under the same category as the faithful Christians who flush away millions a year in tithes to their favourite church? could be enough to turn more people off their religion once they realize how they're being taken advantage of.

Other Comments by digitalia

15. Comment #116354 by drcancerman on January 26, 2008 at 9:54 am

 avatarDigitalia

The point is, putting a sharia bank is one step closer to a sharia law being implemented! How many steps is it needed for that? I dont know, but it is damn close, because if you criticize islam you are a racist, bigot and should be sue and be killed, so, I think you should guess how far we are.


As an atheist I oppose to anything religious in public places like banks, and the idea of having sharia law is repulsive to me or any freethinker. Their belief should be confined in mosques only, or church only for christians.

Other Comments by drcancerman

16. Comment #116358 by QuickEye on January 26, 2008 at 9:59 am

 avatarIt also might be looked at the other way around: the banking trying to sell their products, and sugar-coat their product so that a new market niche could be explored deeper. This in itself shouldn't bring about the change of the country's legislation.
If the product fails, than the bank is supposed to get rid of it. If it is a success, and the bank is making profit on it, than it is a viable business practice. Like offering kosher, halal or vegetarian meal on airplanes.
Renaming 'interest' to something else doesn't change the nature of it, as the article quotes a banker. In that case it is more about the deception by the religion that is the question, but that is not the banks' problem.
If the articles quotes are right, than it seems that the airline (bank) might be selling the same tray of food as kosher/halal/vegetarian: only the label is different. But than again: that is the religion's problem.

Other Comments by QuickEye

17. Comment #116360 by PrimeNumbers on January 26, 2008 at 10:08 am

 avatarWeel, there are many examples in society where we don't give people what they want just because they want it.

However the difference is here that if I and a few friends went to the bank and demanded atheist bank accounts I'd be laughed out the door....

Other Comments by PrimeNumbers

18. Comment #116364 by rod-the-farmer on January 26, 2008 at 10:16 am

 avatarWhat was missing here was exactly what these purported loans would look like. They are charged no "interest", but some other fee ? The devil is always in the details.

Other Comments by rod-the-farmer

19. Comment #116375 by Steve Zara on January 26, 2008 at 10:53 am

It's just a case of remembering that Banks are as honest as religions.


Please don't generalise like this. I use the Co-Operative Bank in the UK. I use it because it has a policy of ethical investment - for example, working to help fight climate change, and to defend human rights. The Co-Operative movement has a long and honourable history.

Cynicism may be fashionable, but it isn't always right.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

20. Comment #116382 by drcancerman on January 26, 2008 at 11:13 am

 avatar
The devil is always in the details.



OI! Dont say that out loud, I'm trying to ambush some unsuspecting individual! If you say that again I won't have a nice place to ambush and get a free soul! Then...I'll have to work for it!!

Gosh...

Other Comments by drcancerman

21. Comment #116424 by kraut on January 26, 2008 at 1:06 pm

 avatar"As far as I am concerned they are all the same."

a bank is a bank is a bank is there to make money, no matter if the shareholders each own 0.0000001% or each ten%.
They might decide to spent the profits differently, but I remember the examples of the Union owned savings institutions in germany - as voracious as any other bank.
And as I said - two crooked organizations hand in hand, a picture to cherish.

Other Comments by kraut

22. Comment #116439 by Eric Blair on January 26, 2008 at 1:37 pm

Sleep of Reason:
It's just a case of remembering that Banks are as honest as religions.

Steve Zara:Please don't generalise like this. I use the Co-Operative Bank in the UK. I use it because it has a policy of ethical investment - for example, working to help fight climate change, and to defend human rights. The Co-Operative movement has a long and honourable history.

Cynicism may be fashionable, but it isn't always right.


So it's OK to generalize about religions but not banks? Some religions do positive things too, obviously.

The point others have made about banks and sharia law (just business) is generally true except that banks, in Canada at least, are regulated by government so creating "sharia-compliant" loans may actually involve government at some point.

Loans are a form of contract, so it's important that nothing in the sharia-type loan should change how commercial law applies to either party.

Otherwise, yes, it's just a marketing ploy. No one, Muslim or not, is obligated to follow.

EB

Other Comments by Eric Blair

23. Comment #116445 by Steve Zara on January 26, 2008 at 1:50 pm

So it's OK to generalize about religions but not banks?


No.

All generalizations are wrong, especially this one.

Other Comments by Steve Zara

24. Comment #116447 by BigJohn on January 26, 2008 at 1:54 pm

 avatarAs is apparent from this, the jews and arabs are closely related in both culture and heritage.

Other Comments by BigJohn

25. Comment #116503 by Vinelectric on January 26, 2008 at 4:48 pm

 avatarIslamic banking maybe deceptive but the back breaking interest rates on my loans are definitiely a crime!

Sharia banking may not be feasible in the real world (as it would halt economic growth eventually) but if any of these bank succeeds in finding an interest free, deception free solution I'll definitely join and invite all my believing and non-believing frineds as well....in my dreams..I suppose !

Other Comments by Vinelectric

26. Comment #116506 by al-rawandi on January 26, 2008 at 5:02 pm

 avatarVinelectric,


I have done some modelling in trying to create an "Islamic system" of investment.

It is impossible to be totally compliant, however the equity market can be a means of investment, so long as companies that are invested in do not engage in

Gambling,
Pornography,
Alchohol
Pork
Weapons
Interest

Companies that have levels of debt or are highly leveraged are excluded. Dow Jones actually has an index of Islamically compliant companies. And there are several mutual funds in the US in the game. I thought about getting the management company I worked for involved, but there was a lot of work to do, and returns were not guaranteed.

Islamic scholars (some) have signed of on a fixed income instrument subsitute that could be used in a fixed income or money market fund. It is known as sukuk. I don't fully understand them, but they are bond alternatives.

All Middle Eastern countries maintain an interest system in addition to any "Islamic" system. Saudi interest rates are directly tied to those in the US.

The fundamental problem is that interest is a method of encouraging lending and incurring risk in the lending. Without interest, banks could not afford to give money to start up companies. In an Islamic system the bank would have to take part equity ownership, and that is not always a good idea.

I have developed a theory on interest free lending, but that is way off topic.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

27. Comment #116513 by Atheist_from_Hell on January 26, 2008 at 5:19 pm

 avatarSo let me get this straight. Some Moslems feel the need to delude themselves that interest on a loan is not interest if it is called something else, so that they can maintain their delusion that the archangel Gabriel spoke to Mohammed 1400 years ago. Lies being used to support other lies. Typical religious nonsense.

Other Comments by Atheist_from_Hell

28. Comment #116515 by al-rawandi on January 26, 2008 at 5:21 pm

 avatarFrom Hell,


Yes. Call it something else, and sleep at night.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

29. Comment #116605 by dragonfirematrix on January 26, 2008 at 7:50 pm

 avatarSharia banking? Sharia banking?? Sharia Banking???

There is no sense giving in to the religious on any subject. The old saying is "if you give them an inch, they will take a mile."

I understand tolerance, and tolerance is a good thing. However, tolerance should only be shown to those who themselves are tolerant. We should show intolerance to those who are intolerant. The religious are not tolerant people. Therefore, how should we treat the Islamic, and Christians for that matter, on any issue?

Other than my above comment, would you like Friday fries and a cup of green pee with that Mecca Burger?

Other Comments by dragonfirematrix

30. Comment #116611 by al-rawandi on January 26, 2008 at 8:00 pm

 avatardragon fly,


The pros? I can run a shariah fund and make 1.5% + on a management fee. I would then proceed to buy alcohol and bacon with the money, so I could again sleep at night.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

31. Comment #116618 by Crossman on January 26, 2008 at 8:22 pm

There's so much unthinking bile on this board it's troubling. All that's happening is that banks, which are private companies, are offering MORE CHOICE in their "products".

Now, I take a rather low view of the banking industry, but equating MORE CHOICE with the imposition of Sharia Law on the population is just silly. Nobody's being forced into anything.

Other Comments by Crossman

32. Comment #116621 by dlitt on January 26, 2008 at 8:44 pm

 avatarWhy not - as in Michael Moore's exposé of the NRA - the scene with the American bank offering free shotguns to new accounts, does not the Canadian banks offer free "beheading" swords for new Sharia accounts?

Other Comments by dlitt

33. Comment #116682 by Szymanowski on January 27, 2008 at 5:13 am

 avatar
All that's happening is that banks, which are private companies, are offering MORE CHOICE in their "products".

Now, I take a rather low view of the banking industry, but equating MORE CHOICE with the imposition of Sharia Law on the population is just silly. Nobody's being forced into anything.

Seconded.

I fail to see the need to bend over backwards to Muslims, of which this is yet another example of.

It's an example of providing a product to suit a market. It's called capitalism, not "bending over backwards". For goodness's sake, if you don't like "sharia" accounts, don't get one!

I'm just waiting for a bank to provide a "Szymanowski" account, in which you deposit a minimum of 1p and get 100,000,000% interest. Your name has to be Szymanowski in order to qualify for the account.

Other Comments by Szymanowski

34. Comment #116808 by Vinelectric on January 27, 2008 at 1:41 pm

 avataral-rawandi

I'm not sure about interest free lending but I'd definitely like to hear your thoughts on that.

I remember contacting an advisor from the SFB, a commercial bank that oversees the Societe Generale's investments in the Sudan about interest-free lending. Their principle was to allow the customer to identify his target investment/purhase..e.g a new car.. then they'd make a payment to the vendor and resell it to the customer at a higher, but fixed, sum similar to a non-cumulative fixed-interest lending but repackaged as "commercial profit" which is Islamically sound.

As if god won't notice!

Other Comments by Vinelectric

35. Comment #116870 by al-rawandi on January 27, 2008 at 5:03 pm

 avatarvinelectric,


Societe General... Side note, one of their traders sinlge handedly lost them 7.5 million dollars on the Euro futures market through unauthorized trades.

Yes I believe purchasing the target item and reselling it falls under "tijara" and is not "riba'" as defined by the scholars. However it is merely a semantic and temporal distinction.

It all boils down to the fact that banks need to make a profit. Anything that forgbid that will be bypassed in one way or another.

As for an interest free loan, it would have to be limited to a profit making venture.

I would give you $100,000 to start a $200,000 business. The first month you would pay me some principal and 50% of the monthly profit, as I am a 50% owner of the company. The next month you would pay some principal, however you would pay less of the profit as my ownership stake has decreased. This would continue progessively.

Two things are important. There is no guaranteed income so as part owner, my profit above the value of the loan is contingent on the success of the business.

Second, the loan would have a mathematically identical structure to a standard loan (which has payments that are mostly interest at the front end and mostly principal at the back end).

This could either be better or worse for a borrower or a lender. It doesn't do enough to encourage risk though. However it would avoid a standardized interest payment.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

36. Comment #116926 by Cartomancer on January 27, 2008 at 7:57 pm

 avatarAs a devout worshipper of the Great Lord Mammon I am deeply offended by these banks which refuse to call interest payments by their true and holy name - they are pandering to the heretic and should be excommunicated from the global community of worthy Mammonites. The divine favours to their chairmen must be removed posthaste and a severe anathema placed on them forbidding participation in the midwinter festival of capitalist gift exchange...

How dare they take the name of the Profit in vain!

Other Comments by Cartomancer

37. Comment #116947 by Cartomancer on January 27, 2008 at 9:20 pm

 avatarDon't worry, the tarot tells me that it's going to happen, so I know in advance! Or failing that, as a Mammonite, I could just flip a coin...

Other Comments by Cartomancer

38. Comment #116952 by Goldy on January 27, 2008 at 10:04 pm

 avatarThere was a BBC program about this about a year ago - Islamic banking, not back door sharia into Canada.
Quite popular in the UK - and as many have pointed out, banks want customers and they'll do anything to get them, even customers under the impression some illiterate had an angel talk to him...
I did get teh impression that banks operating "Islamic" loans get their moeny back. It's all in the details - call interest by another name and then get the lawyers to really define usury and interest to you in you wish to quibble.
As it is, it's all a scam. Just like religion. Just a shame so many people are so stupid to fall for either....

Other Comments by Goldy

39. Comment #116979 by hcholm on January 28, 2008 at 12:29 am

Comment #116445 by Steve Zara

All generalizations are wrong


That depends a lot on your definition of "wrong". Without generalisations, you'd have big trouble getting through the day. Most of the things we do in our everyday life is based on assumptions based on generalisations. If that was not the case, you couldn't even drink a glass of water without first analysing it to find out if it contained something harmful. Generalisations can definitely be right.

Even in many scientific contexts, you need generalisations. How could you write a history book without making generalisations? How could social life even be possible without generalisations about other people?

Other Comments by hcholm

40. Comment #116981 by Marcus Hill on January 28, 2008 at 12:33 am

My wife is a chartered management accountant. A couple of weeks ago, the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants sent her a leaflet about a new qualification they're offering - in Islamic Finance (or some similarly named thing, we've recycled the leaflet).

All of these things are not, in any way, "steps towards the introduction of Sharia law". They're merely the market reacting to demand. Trying to suppress the symptoms - the rise of Islamic financial products - will merely foster a greater sense of alienation and prosecution among Muslims. Addressing the cause - by reducing the spread and depth of religious (in this case, Islamic) belief - will mean the symptoms will go away by themselves as people no longer want these products.

Other Comments by Marcus Hill

41. Comment #117004 by alexandersaundersed on January 28, 2008 at 3:01 am

I can't comment about the accuracy of the translation and the subsequent claims of the author of this piece, but I think its a tad rash to claim it is "bending over backwards" and allowing sharia law to make a back-door entrance; banks can offer whatever services they like to get what every customers they like.

Offering this form of banking does not mean that we shall soon be stoning people, etc. Also, there might be non-muslim persons who would like the possibilitty of not acquiring, nor paying, interest, so why not supply the service? Is it such a necessary defence of our culture that people/citizens MUST earn interest on loans, morgages and savings?

Other Comments by alexandersaundersed

42. Comment #117012 by CJ22 on January 28, 2008 at 3:52 am

 avatarOverblown tosh. In countries where religions are given tax breaks and preferential treatment in our civil institutions, sharia banking, vapid as it is, is the least of our problems.

Other Comments by CJ22

43. Comment #117018 by Adam Morrison on January 28, 2008 at 4:59 am

 avatarI thought it was great when we didn't legalize sharia law. Taht being said, if Muslims in Canada want a 'Sharia' account, as long as it follows Canadian Law and doesn't include any religious overtures against Canadian common law, let 'em.

But I have to wonder how the rights of wives vs. husbands are played in these shariah accouhnts.

Other Comments by Adam Morrison

44. Comment #117030 by Jonathan Dore on January 28, 2008 at 5:55 am

Chris Bell wrote:
I may not like it because I think it needlessly separates and alienates Muslims from mainstream culture. If that is all the article is saying, then I agree.


Yes, I think this is the essential point Chris. Even if it doesn't involve the creation of a new law or the amendment of an existing one, it carves out yet another area of normal human life in which muslims are made to feel by their leaders that they cannot participate in the same institutions, or in the same way, as the rest of the population. One more sense in which they are made to feel separate from the mainstream, rather than a part of it. Since driving a wedge between Western populations and the muslim populations they host is a key goal of Islamists everywhere, this is right up their street, and a compelling reason why this sort of development should be strenuously resisted.

Other Comments by Jonathan Dore

45. Comment #117033 by jeepyjay on January 28, 2008 at 6:03 am

 avatarThis is not just in Canada. Islamic banking in the UK was aproved by the FSA in 2004:

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pages/About/Media/notes/bn016.shtml

There are already three branches of The Islamic Bank in Leicester alone:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4264939.stm

And ordinary banks like Lloyds TSB are offering sharia-compatible accounts.

"All generalisations are wrong"
Especially generalisations about generalisations!

Other Comments by jeepyjay

46. Comment #117036 by al-rawandi on January 28, 2008 at 6:14 am

 avatarRe reading this article was helpful. Someone asked about the accuracy of translation, which I determine to be acceptable renderings of the Arabic meanings.

I believe the author of the aritcle has some hostility to Islamic banking. I share this. The word "riba" has been mistranslated as "interest". The word means usury and was used to describe predatory lending practices 1400 years ago and has nothing to do with standardized interest rates of today.

And in the game of semantics that these clerics are playing it would be unacceptable to pay or recieve interest (i.e. above par value) however it would be semantically permissible to purchase zero coupon securities, which are sold at a discount and mature at par value, with no interst payments whatsoever (US Treasury Bills, etc...) With this in mind it is not hard to see that Shariah banking is yet another financial scam. At least the Muslims are now getting scammed too. Equality for all.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

47. Comment #117054 by al-rawandi on January 28, 2008 at 6:58 am

 avatarSleep of Reason,


I agree this is a potential. I think the issue is that govt.'s or people should say that creating semantic substitutes does not rid you of interest. So if it is merely a semantic game please buy zero coupon (discount notes) securities, but do not ask about "fake interest".

I did modelling for an Islamic investment fund. I don't see a problem with that on the equity side since they can choose companies that fit with their beliefs, the same as "Green Funds" and "Tech Funds". But to substantively change the banking system could be problematic.

Other Comments by al-rawandi

48. Comment #117124 by Vinelectric on January 28, 2008 at 10:03 am

 avatarThanks al-rawandi

I like that model but of course it's not just the success of the business you need to worry about it's the stability of the market itslef! So I suppose I can only practically be Sharia compliant if I adopted that model in, say Japan with its low inflation rates, and used the money to invest in a stable business like Mitsubishi or Sony for a year at a time!!

Other Comments by Vinelectric

49. Comment #117131 by Vinelectric on January 28, 2008 at 10:11 am

 avatarMarcus Hill

I think you're absolutely right. I personally know of at least two friends who chose to bank with HSBC because it offers the so called "Amanah" Sharia friendly accounts. The involvement of more reputable banks in this business will help keep purely Islamic ventures (e.g the newly founded Islamic Bank of Britain) at bay as the bigger banks are likely to be able to afford to offer more attractive services anyway.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

50. Comment #117259 by al-rawandi on January 28, 2008 at 1:06 pm

 avatarVinelectric,

Good point. The large banks can crush Islamic banks before they even get rolling.

Other Comments by al-rawandi
Reload Comments | Back to Top

More Comments: 1 2 | Next | Last

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: