Article Review: Conventional Bank Interest and the Murabahah (cost-plus-profit) Contract in Islamic Finance: Two sides of a Coin or two Coins of different Sides?
By Abdullahi
Saliu Ishola & Isa Olawale Solahudeen
Murabahah is commonly used for
financing the purchase of raw materials, machinery, equipment, and consumer
durables. Because of the trust involved in the transaction and the aspiration
of people that Murabahah is able to meet, it has been widely used and customers
of Islamic banks all over the world have been making a preferred choice over
other contracts. Murabahah contract is legal in accordance to the Shariah law
and it had been practised by the early generations of Muslims. However, in the
modern days, there are criticism and condemnation of some contemporary jurists.
One of the argument is that Murabahah is too close to bank interest (Riba), or
even the same as bank interest, but just called or being ‘legalised’ with other
name or brand.
“Murabahah may be defined as a sale
in which the margin of profit is mutually agreed upon between the buyer and the
seller. The payment of sale price, inclusive of the agreed profit margin, may
be immediate or deferred and either in lump sum or in instalments”[1].
Initially Murabahah was a form of sales agreement, but now being utilised as a
mode of financing in the modern Islamic financial institutions[2].
Murabahah contract is of two forms, simple murabahah and murabahah to subscribers.
The former is “when the seller market their goods to the buyer at a price
corresponding acquisition cost plus profit margin desired” while the latter
“involves three parties, namely the subscribers, the buyer and seller. It also
involves as an intermediary buyers for their expertise or because the buyer
will need financing”[3].
In modern time, the operation of
Murabahah can take three forms. First, it may be that contracting parties
mutually make unbinding promise to enter into this agreement and without
mentioning a marked-up price in advance before the delivery of the commodity.
Second, the marked-up price is mentioned before the delivery of the commodity.
Third, the contracting parties mutually agree that both parties are liable to
complete the contract and a marked-up price is mentioned before the commodity
is delivered[4].
The first form is allowed as there is no binding promise between parties as to
the completion of the contract and the customer is not liable to compensate the
bank in case the commodity perished. There is also a risk as the bank is not
sure if the customer is going to buy the commodity with profit. However the
second and third forms are unlawful as the profitable amount to the bank has
been fixed, and the other is because both parties agreed as to the liability of
the parties to the completion of the contract and fixed profit to the bank.
The following conditions have to be
met in order to make Murabahah a legal transaction. Knowledge of the initial
price by the parties, knowledge of the profit margin, the original price is
fungible, the goods in which the Murabahah is traded must not be eligible to
riba, and initial contract must be valid.
While the principal murabahah
steps are as follows. “First client indicates an interest in purchasing a
particular asset from the bank for a certain price. Second, the client
identifies the vendor, selects the goods and advises its particulars to the
bank in writing. Third, the bank acquires the asset and offers to sell it to
the client and the vendor then will make delivery of the asset to the client.
Lastly, the agency ends. The client accepts the offer and the bank immediately
sells the asset to the client, with payment due on agreed date in future”[5].
In opposing the criticism on Murabahah,
Usmani said, “I do not subscribe to the view of those people who do not find
any difference between the transactions of conventional banks and Murabahah and
Ijarah for perpetuating the same business with a different name, because if
Murabahah and Ijarah are implemented with their necessary conditions, they have
many points of difference which distinguish them from interest-based
transactions”[6].
[1] Muhammad
Nejatullah Siddiqi, Issues in Islamic Banking (The Islamic Foundation,
1983), p 137, footnote 1.
Comments
Post a Comment