The Qur’aan Majeed states:“And when the debtor is in difficult straits, then(he should be granted) an extension
until (it becomes) easy (for him to pay).”



The teaching and exhortation of the Qur’aan are to show kindness to the
debtor and to grant him adequate time until he is by the means to pay. It is
in diametric conflict with this Qur’aanic exhortation and command to penalize
the defaulting debtor with haraam riba. The view which promotes the riba penalty
cannever be reconciled with the Qur’aan by presentation of the ‘dishonesty’ argument.
Firstly, be- cause dishonesty is not grounds for legalizing riba. Secondly, the
banks cannot claim with certitude that certain clients are deliberately procrastinating
in their payments inspite of having the means. There is absolutely no way of
determining the attitude and motive of the defaulting clients. Thirdly, the application
of the riba penalty is and will be uniform, for all and sundry. The computer
churning out its monthly statements is insensitive to the straits and attitudes
of de- faulters for the simple reason that the financiers themselves are in-
sensitive to the plight of debtors. It cannot distinguish between the two types
of defaulters.

Fourthly, the banks cannot and will not institute elaborate, costly and time-consuming
investigations to ascertain if the many defaulters of any particular month
are dishonest or honest. Such exercises will deplete whatever extra funds the
riba penalties had generated. In fact, the banks will have to bear additional
expenses should they embark on such senseless inquiries and impractical exercises.

In the light of what we have explained, the following statement of Hadhrat
Mufti Saheb is meaningless and does not mitigate the crime of legalizing riba: “If
it appears his default is due to poverty, no compensation can be claimed from
him. Indeed he must be given respite until he is able to pay,…………”

It has already been pointed out earlier that establishing the ‘dishonesty’ of
a defaulter is merely theoretical. In practice it is hardly possible to gain
certitude in this regard. Furthermore, banks, whether non-Muslim or Muslim,
have a uniform policy and rule on money-matters. In the domain of finance,
they behave like aliens, not like Insaan. They conduct themselves like the
Yahood. If necessary they will squeeze blood out of a stone to acquire the
extra riba. That is because the Qur’aan says: “Those who devour
riba do not stand except like one whom Shaitaan has driven to insanity with
(his) touch.” And assuming that the dishonesty of a client can be established
with certitude, then too it is haraam to charge haraam riba on the pretext
of preventing ‘exploitation’ by debtors. The real exploitation
is by those who devour riba and who stand like insane men —driven to
in- sanity by the touch of Shaitaan. Even if the riba charge is diverted to ‘charity’,
the act of exploiting the debtor with haraam riba is moti- vated by an inordinate
and an insatiable greed for money, hence the financier cannot exercise a little
patience for Allah’s Sake to ease the pressure from the servants of Allah
Ta’ala.

Rarely does a man default in his payments on the basis of: “...because
they know that they will not have to pay any additional amount on account of
default.”

People are averse to despoiling their credit-worthiness. In this age people
survive on credit. To continue to gain the benefits of credit, even dishonest
people endeavour to meet their commitments. How- ever, circumstances compel
default in payments. The claim made in the aforementioned statement of Hadhrat
Mufti Saheb is furthest from the minds of those who are unable to meet their
commitments on due date. It is difficult circumstances, rather than dishonesty
which compel default in payments. Be it as it may. The fundamental consideration
in negation of riba penalty is that riba is haraam and the element of dishonesty
or any other factor cannot be presented as a basis for justifying riba.