The PRIMARY OIC ruling behind the halal INVESTMENT CERTIFICATE / muqaradah bond
The PRIMARY OIC ruling behind the halal INVESTMENT CERTIFICATE / muqaradah bond — the ancestor of the modern sukuk — the International Islamic Fiqh Academy (OIC), Resolution No. 30 (5/4), titled in the Academy's official English edition 'Muqaradah and Investment Certificates' (the older IRTI/IDB printed edition renders the same ruling '"Muqaradha" Bonds and Investment Certificates'), adopted at the Academy's 4th session in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 18-23 Jumada al-Akhira 1408h (6-11 February 1988). This is the corpus's EIGHTH article anchored on a genuine PRIMARY OIC / IIFA resolution read verbatim, and its FIRST on the INVESTMENT / CAPITAL-MARKETS side — after the financing side (Res 10 on interest, Res 40-41 on murabaha), the deposit side (Res 86, Res 222) and the home-finance side (Res 110 on lease-to-own). It is the foundational supra-madhab test for any 'Islamic bond', 'sukuk' or 'investment certificate': does the instrument represent GENUINE JOINT OWNERSHIP of a real venture and its profit-and-loss, or is it a disguised interest bond with a guaranteed return? The resolution's whole design is to keep the certificate a real mudarabah share, not a loan. Its anti-riba core is criterion 4, verbatim (official edition): 'Neither the prospectus nor the Muqaradah bonds should contain a guarantee, from the fund manager, for the capital or a fixed profit or a profit based on a percentage of the capital. If such clause is implied explicitly or implicitly, the guarantee condition is voided, and the Mudarib is entitled to a profit equal to that of a similar Mudarabah.' It bans fixed dividends too, verbatim: 'The prospectus or Muqaradah bond issued pursuant to it, should not contain any statement that the company has fixed in dividends. If such clause exists, the contract is null and void.' — and it insists that 'Only the profit is to be divided ... that is, an amount in excess of the capital, and not the revenue or the yield', measured after Tandeed (liquidation) or evaluation. The certificate 'must represent a joint share in the project', conferring 'all rights and privileges provided by Shariah to the owner over its property, e.g. sale, donation, mortgage, inheritance', and its tradability is governed by what the capital currently consists of — cash (money-exchange rules), debts (loan rules), or mixed assets (tradable at agreed price only if the major part is goods and benefits). It is the single clearest primary-source checklist an ordinary reader can put to any 'Shariah-compliant bond': no capital guarantee, no fixed or percentage-of-capital return, genuine ownership of a genuine venture, and profit that is only ever the real surplus after the venture is actually valued.
What this source says
Every one of this corpus's other primary OIC anchors sits on one side of a bank's business — the FINANCING side (Resolution No. 10, that conventional interest is riba; Resolution No. 40-41, murabaha to the purchase orderer), the DEPOSIT side (Resolution No. 86, that a current account is a loan; Resolution No. 222, on the perks a bank may give a depositor), or the HOME-FINANCE side (Resolution No. 110, lease-to-own). This entry opens the fourth and final side: the INVESTMENT / capital-markets side — how a Muslim's money can be put to work in a tradable security WITHOUT that security becoming an interest-bearing bond. Resolution No. 30 (5/4), adopted by the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of the OIC at its 4th session in Jeddah over 18-23 Jumada al-Akhira 1408h (6-11 February 1988), is the foundational primary ruling on the 'Muqaradah bond' or 'investment certificate' — and the muqaradah bond is the direct ancestor of the modern sukuk. Like the Academy's other finance rulings it is collective ijtihad by the OIC's supra-madhab body of assembled senior scholars, which is why it can speak for the practice of the whole Muslim world rather than one school. The resolution grew out of a dedicated seminar the Academy ran with the Islamic Research and Training Institute (IRTI) of the Islamic Development Bank in September 1987; it is, in effect, the Muslim world's first collective attempt to design an Islamic alternative to the interest bond, and everything modern sukuk practice does is built on the principles it lays down here.
Start with what a muqaradah bond IS, because the whole ruling depends on it. Verbatim (official edition, clause 1): 'Muqaradah Certificates are investment instruments which allocate the Qirad capital (Mudarabah) by floating certificates, as a proof of the capital's ownership, on the basis of shares of equal value, registered in the name of their owners, as joint owners of shares in the venture capital or whatever shape it may take, in proportion to the each one's share therein. It is preferable to call this investment instrument "Muqaradah Bond."' (The IRTI edition prefers the name 'Mugaradha Deed', and says the certificate is 'an evidence of capital ownership' rather than 'a proof' — the same idea in different words.) The certificate is not a receipt for a loan; it is a title to a genuine share in a real venture. That is the hinge on which halal and haram turn here, and the resolution spends its nine clauses making sure the certificate stays that and does not quietly become a loan with a coupon.
The FOUR ELEMENTS of a Shariah-acceptable form (clause 2) spell out what that ownership requires. (i) Verbatim: 'The bond must represent a joint share in the project, for whose establishment or financing it has been issued. Ownership remains valid throughout the project duration from its beginning to its end. It also confers all rights and privileges provided by Shariah to the owner over its property, e.g. sale, donation, mortgage, inheritance, etc. bearing in mind that such certificates represent the Mudarabah capital.' A real owner can sell, gift, mortgage and bequeath the thing — a lender cannot, because a lender owns only a debt. (ii) The contract is formed through the prospectus, which 'must provide all data required by Shariah for the Qirad contract (Mudarabah), such as the nature of the capital, profit distribution, and other conditions related to the issue' — all of which 'must be compatible with Shariah.' (iii) THE TRADABILITY RULE, which is the part that most directly polices riba in the secondary market: the certificates are tradable once issued, 'taking into consideration the following criteria prescribed by Shariah': verbatim, '(a) If the Qirad capital, collected from subscription prior to its use in the project, is still in cash, trading Muqaradah certificates is considered an exchange of money with money, governed by Shariah rules on money exchange. (b) If the Qirad capital turns into debts, Mudarabah certificates should be traded according to the rules applied to loans. (c) If the Qirad capital is converted into mixed assets, e.g. cash, debts, goods, benefits, Muqaradah certificates may be traded at the price agreed upon provided the major part of the capital is in the form of goods and benefits; if it mainly consists of cash and debts, exchanging Muqaradah certificates must comply with Shariah rules ...'. In plain terms: you cannot freely trade a certificate at a marked-up price when all it really represents is cash or debt (that would be selling money for more money, i.e. riba); you can trade it freely only once it represents a genuine bundle of real assets and usufructs. (iv) The manager 'who receives the funds collected from the underwriting of sukuk' is the Mudarib, whose 'role in handling the underwritten funds and the project property, is that of a trustworthy person, who may not be held liable, unless his liability is permissible under Shariah rules' — a trustee, not a borrower, and so not a guarantor.
That non-guarantee is the resolution's ANTI-RIBA CORE, and it is stated flatly in clause 4. Verbatim (official edition): 'Neither the prospectus nor the Muqaradah bonds should contain a guarantee, from the fund manager, for the capital or a fixed profit or a profit based on a percentage of the capital. If such clause is implied explicitly or implicitly, the guarantee condition is voided, and the Mudarib is entitled to a profit equal to that of a similar Mudarabah.' This is the single line that separates a halal investment certificate from an interest bond. An interest bond promises you your money back plus a fixed or percentage return whatever happens to the underlying business; this resolution forbids exactly that — no guarantee of the capital, no fixed profit, and no profit expressed as a percentage OF THE CAPITAL (a percentage of capital is just interest by another name). A percentage of the actual PROFIT is fine; a percentage of the capital is not. And the sanction is severe and self-correcting: any such guarantee, even one only 'implied ... implicitly', is struck out, and the manager drops to a plain similar-mudarabah wage. Clause 5 adds that the instrument 'should not contain any statement obligating a sale, even if conditional or related to future' (only a non-binding promise to sell, executed later at an expert-set, mutually-agreed price, is allowed) — the same separation-of-acts discipline the corpus's lease-to-own entry (Resolution No. 110) turns on.
Clause 6 bans fixed dividends and defines what 'profit' even means, which matters because a 'dividend' that is really fixed is just a coupon. Verbatim: 'The prospectus or Muqaradah bond issued pursuant to it, should not contain any statement that the company has fixed in dividends. If such clause exists, the contract is null and void.' It follows that the instrument 'may not stipulate payment of a specific amount to the shareholder or to the owner of the project', and that 'Only the profit is to be divided, as determined by applying rules of Shariah; that is, an amount in excess of the capital, and not the revenue or the yield. Tandeed (liquidation) or evaluation of the project in monetary terms determines the extent of profit.' Profit, in other words, is the REAL surplus left after the venture is actually cashed out or valued — not the gross revenue, and never a pre-agreed sum. Clause 7 confirms that profits are 'due when realized and owned by liquidation or evaluation and become payable only upon distribution', and that anything paid before that liquidation/evaluation 'is considered a payment on account on the dividend' — an advance against a profit not yet proven, not a guaranteed instalment.
The last two clauses handle the honest ways to soften risk WITHOUT smuggling a guarantee back in. Clause 8: there is 'no Shariah prohibition' (the IRTI edition says 'It is permitted by Shari'a') to set aside, by disclosed clause, a percentage of each period's distribution 'as special reserve for contingencies, such as loss of capital' — the investors may self-insure out of their own profits. Clause 9: there is likewise no bar to a promise by a genuinely independent THIRD PARTY 'totally unrelated to the two parties to the contract' to 'donate a specific amount, without any counter benefit, to meet losses in a given project' — but only if that commitment 'is an independent one, not related to the Mudarabah contract, in the sense that the enforcement of the contract is not conditional to the fulfillment of the promise'. The moment a loss-cover promise is baked into the mudarabah itself, or comes from the manager or a related party, it becomes the forbidden capital guarantee of clause 4; kept genuinely separate and gratuitous, it is a permissible donation. This is the same substance-over-form logic that runs through the whole corpus: a third party's free gift is charity, but the same money promised by the manager as a condition of the deal is riba.
The resolution closes with a 'Second' section noting four proposed formulae for investing Waqf (endowment) property — a partnership between Waqf institutions and financial contributors; offering Waqf real estate to businessmen for a share of revenue; establishing Awqaf through manufacturing (istisna') contracts with Islamic banks for profit-sharing; or renting Waqf premises for a rental in kind such as construction on the site — which the Council listed 'as suggestions' needing 'further research and studies', not as settled rulings; they are reported here as exactly that and no ruling is claimed on them.
Why does this matter for the everyday question 'is this sukuk / Islamic bond / investment certificate actually halal'? Because it hands you a concrete, supra-madhab checklist from the primary source itself: (1) OWNERSHIP — does the certificate give you a genuine joint share in a real venture you could sell, gift, mortgage or bequeath, or is it really a receipt for a loan? (2) NO GUARANTEE — is your capital un-guaranteed and your return un-fixed, so you truly share the venture's risk, or are you promised your money back plus a set or percentage-of-capital return (which this resolution voids as riba)? (3) REAL PROFIT ONLY — is what you receive the actual surplus after the venture is liquidated or valued, not a slice of gross revenue or a pre-agreed coupon? (4) TRADABILITY — when you sell the certificate on, does it represent real assets and usufructs (freely tradable) rather than mere cash or debt (which must follow money-exchange or loan rules)? A product that passes all four is doing what this resolution permits; one that fails any is, on the Academy's reasoning, an interest instrument in Islamic dress. The Academy itself built directly on this foundation sixteen years later, ruling specifically on lease-backed sukuk in Resolution No. 137 (3/15) 'Sukuk al-Ijarah (Leasing Bonds)' at its 15th session in Muscat (2004), which restated the same non-guarantee principle in the sukuk context ('The issuer or manager of Sukuk al-Ijarah should not guarantee the principal or return of the Sukuk, and in case of total or partial damage of the leased assets, the loss has to be borne by the Sukuk holders.').
Two honest limits belong on this entry. First, on SOURCES: this is one resolution confirmed across two genuinely different English translations — the Academy's own official English edition (October 2021), used here as the authoritative text, and the older IRTI/IDB printed edition (1985-2000). They agree on the resolution number, session, city, dates and entire operative structure; they differ in wording throughout (Bond vs Deed, tradable vs negotiable, 'Qirad contract' vs 'Qirad (Public Loan) contract'), which strengthens confidence in the substance; and they differ in how they cite the predecessor 3rd-session resolution that ordered the seminar (official 'no. 22 (10/3)' vs IRTI 'n 10/3'), a citation-convention difference disclosed above, not a substantive conflict. Both are English renderings, not the binding Arabic original. Second, on SCOPE: no madhab-by-madhab breakdown, no vote tally, no market or AUM figure, no hadith number, no content of the cross-referenced predecessor Resolution No. 22 (10/3) asserted beyond the cross-reference, and no claim about which specific AU/UK/CA/US sukuk or fund does or does not comply — the four tests are given for the reader to apply, and no product is graded here.
Wording inside quotation marks is quoted from the source. The rest is this notebook’s summary of it — read the original before relying on it.
Provenance
- Compiled from
- Compiled 2026-07-08 from TWO genuinely different English translations of the SAME primary resolution, cross-read: [1] the INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC FIQH ACADEMY's own OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy' (official edition, October 2021, published by the Academy at iifa-aifi.org), which prints the ruling as 'Resolution No. 30 (5/4) / Muqaradah and Investment Certificates', with the session line 'holding its 4th session in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on 18-23 Jumada al-Akhira 1408h (6-11 February 1988)' and the full operative text (the nine 'First' clauses on Shariah-acceptable Muqaradah bonds plus the 'Second' note on four Waqf-investment formulae) — extracted verbatim from the published PDF; and [2] the IRTI/IDB PRINTED EDITION 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the Council of the Islamic Fiqh Academy 1985-2000' (Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah), which prints the same ruling as 'RESOLUTION No 30 (5/4) CONCERNING "MUQARADHA" BONDS AND INVESTMENT CERTIFICATES', with the same 4th session / Jeddah / 18-23 Jumada Thani 1408H (6-11 February 1988) and the same operative structure — extracted verbatim from the published PDF. THESE TWO ARE GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS, not two printings of one rendering: the official edition calls the instrument a 'Muqaradah Bond' where the IRTI edition prefers 'Mugaradha Deed'; the official uses 'tradable'/'traded' where IRTI uses 'negotiable'/'negotiated'; the official reads 'the Qirad contract (Mudarabah)' where IRTI glosses it 'the "Qirad" (Public Loan) contract (the Mudharaba)'; and the two spell the transliterations differently throughout (Muqaradah/Muqaradha, Mudarib/Mudharib). This is a STRONG two-source pairing because the substance survives two independent renderings. ONE NUMBERING DIFFERENCE IS DISCLOSED, NOT PAPERED OVER: both editions cross-reference the predecessor 3rd-session resolution that ordered the underlying seminar, but the official edition cites it as 'the Academy resolution no. 22 (10/3) at the third session' while the IRTI edition cites the same resolution as 'resolution n 10/3 adopted by the 3rd session' — i.e. the official edition gives both the running number (22) and the session-code (10/3) whereas the IRTI edition gives only the session-code (10/3). This is a difference of citation convention for the SAME predecessor resolution (the corpus already carries its own note that the official edition's Resolution No. 22 (10/3) is titled 'Muqaradah Bonds, Development and Investment Certificates'), not a substantive conflict; it is reported here exactly as each edition prints it, without this entry asserting anything about the content of that predecessor resolution beyond the cross-reference. Both editions are English renderings, not the binding Arabic original.
- Source
- PRIMARY RULING (full title, session/city/dates, and the full operative text — the nine 'First' clauses on Shariah-acceptable Muqaradah bonds and the 'Second' note on four Waqf-investment formulae) from [1] the INTERNATIONAL ISLAMIC FIQH ACADEMY (OIC) OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy' (official edition, October 2021), printing the ruling as 'Resolution No. 30 (5/4) / Muqaradah and Investment Certificates', 'holding its 4th session in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on 18-23 Jumada al-Akhira 1408h (6-11 February 1988)' — extracted verbatim from the published PDF (https://iifa-aifi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Resolutions-Recommendations-of-the-IIFA-Official-Edition-Oct-2021.pdf), read 2026-07-08. CONFIRMING SECOND, GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATION from [2] the IRTI/IDB PRINTED EDITION, 'Resolutions and Recommendations of the Council of the Islamic Fiqh Academy 1985-2000' (Islamic Research and Training Institute, Islamic Development Bank, Jeddah), printing the same ruling as 'RESOLUTION No 30 (5/4) CONCERNING "MUQARADHA" BONDS AND INVESTMENT CERTIFICATES', same 4th session / Jeddah / 18-23 Jumada Thani 1408H (6-11 February 1988) and same operative structure — extracted verbatim from the published PDF (https://zulkiflihasan.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/majma-fiqh.pdf), read 2026-07-08. THE TWO ARE GENUINELY DIFFERENT TRANSLATIONS ('Muqaradah Bond' vs 'Mugaradha Deed'; 'tradable'/'traded' vs 'negotiable'/'negotiated'; 'the Qirad contract (Mudarabah)' vs 'the "Qirad" (Public Loan) contract (the Mudharaba)'; transliterations Muqaradah/Muqaradha and Mudarib/Mudharib throughout) — a strong pairing, since the substance survives two independent renderings. ONE NUMBERING DIFFERENCE DISCLOSED, NOT PAPERED OVER: the predecessor 3rd-session resolution that ordered the underlying seminar is cited by the official edition as 'the Academy resolution no. 22 (10/3) at the third session' and by the IRTI edition as 'resolution n 10/3 adopted by the 3rd session' — the same predecessor resolution under two citation conventions (running-number-plus-session-code vs session-code only), reported as printed, not a substantive conflict. NO fabrication: no madhab-by-madhab tally, no vote count, no hadith number, no market/AUM/named-fund figure, and no content of the cross-referenced Resolution No. 22 (10/3) asserted beyond reporting the cross-reference. The reference to the later Resolution No. 137 (3/15) 'Sukuk al-Ijarah (Leasing Bonds)' (15th session, Muscat, 14-19 Muharram 1425h / 6-11 March 2004) and its quoted clause 8 are likewise taken verbatim from the same official IIFA edition and the Academy's own page (https://iifa-aifi.org/en/32880.html), read 2026-07-08.
- School / basis
- Cross-madhab / collective-ijtihad (the International Islamic Fiqh Academy of the OIC is a supra-madhab body of assembled senior scholars; its resolutions represent collective ijtihad rather than a single school's position). Resolution No. 30 (5/4), 4th session, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, 18-23 Jumada al-Akhira 1408h (6-11 February 1988). Operative content, verbatim from the Academy's official English edition (Oct 2021), 'First: Shariah-acceptable Forms of Muqaradah BONDS'. CLAUSE 1 (definition): 'Muqaradah Certificates are investment instruments which allocate the Qirad capital (Mudarabah) by floating certificates, as a proof of the capital's ownership, on the basis of shares of equal value, registered in the name of their owners, as joint owners of shares in the venture capital or whatever shape it may take, in proportion to the each one's share therein. It is preferable to call this investment instrument "Muqaradah Bond."' CLAUSE 2, FOUR ELEMENTS: (i) 'The bond must represent a joint share in the project ... Ownership remains valid throughout the project duration from its beginning to its end. It also confers all rights and privileges provided by Shariah to the owner over its property, e.g. sale, donation, mortgage, inheritance, etc. bearing in mind that such certificates represent the Mudarabah capital.' (ii) the contract is concluded on the prospectus's terms, which 'must provide all data required by Shariah for the Qirad contract (Mudarabah)'. (iii) tradability once issued, with three criteria: '(a) If the Qirad capital ... is still in cash, trading Muqaradah certificates is considered an exchange of money with money, governed by Shariah rules on money exchange. (b) If the Qirad capital turns into debts, Mudarabah certificates should be traded according to the rules applied to loans. (c) If the Qirad capital is converted into mixed assets ... may be traded at the price agreed upon provided the major part of the capital is in the form of goods and benefits; if it mainly consists of cash and debts, exchanging Muqaradah certificates must comply with Shariah rules ...'. (iv) the fund-receiver 'is called the Mudarib ... [his] role in handling the underwritten funds and the project property, is that of a trustworthy person, who may not be held liable, unless his liability is permissible under Shariah rules.' CLAUSE 4 (NON-GUARANTEE, the anti-riba core): 'Neither the prospectus nor the Muqaradah bonds should contain a guarantee, from the fund manager, for the capital or a fixed profit or a profit based on a percentage of the capital. If such clause is implied explicitly or implicitly, the guarantee condition is voided, and the Mudarib is entitled to a profit equal to that of a similar Mudarabah.' CLAUSE 5: 'should not contain any statement obligating a sale, even if conditional or related to future' (only a promise to sell, executed later by contract at an expert-set agreed price, is allowed). CLAUSE 6 (no fixed dividend): 'should not contain any statement that the company has fixed in dividends. If such clause exists, the contract is null and void.' -> 'may not stipulate payment of a specific amount to the shareholder or to the owner of the project'; 'Only the profit is to be divided ... that is, an amount in excess of the capital, and not the revenue or the yield. Tandeed (liquidation) or evaluation of the project in monetary terms determines the extent of profit.' CLAUSE 7: profits 'due when realized and owned by liquidation or evaluation and become payable only upon distribution'; anything paid before Tandeed/evaluation 'is considered a payment on account on the dividend.' CLAUSE 8: 'There is no Shariah prohibition to include ... a clause stating that at the end of each period, a certain percentage shall be deducted ... and deposited as special reserve for contingencies, such as loss of capital.' CLAUSE 9: no bar to a genuinely independent third party 'totally unrelated to the two parties to the contract' promising to 'donate a specific amount, without any counter benefit, to meet losses', provided the commitment 'is an independent one, not related to the Mudarabah contract'. 'SECOND' section: four Waqf-investment formulae listed 'as suggestions' needing further research, not settled rulings. Load-bearing for THIS site as the PRIMARY OIC anchor of the INVESTMENT / capital-markets side and the ancestor of modern sukuk, complementing Resolution No. 137 (3/15) 'Sukuk al-Ijarah (Leasing Bonds)' (15th session, Muscat, 2004) which restates the same non-guarantee principle for lease-backed sukuk. Presented faithfully to scope: no madhab-by-madhab tally, no vote count, no hadith number, no market/AUM figure, no content of the cross-referenced predecessor Resolution No. 22 (10/3) beyond the cross-reference, and no product graded. IRTI/IDB edition confirms the same operative content in a genuinely different translation (Bond->Deed, tradable->negotiable, 'Qirad contract'->'Qirad (Public Loan) contract'; predecessor cited as 'n 10/3' rather than 'no. 22 (10/3)').
- Captured
- 2026-07-08
- Added
- 2026-07-08
- Trust
- Primary or near-primary source with a stable public URL.
Compiler’s note
The corpus's EIGHTH article anchored on a genuine PRIMARY OIC / International Islamic Fiqh Academy resolution read verbatim, and its FIRST on the INVESTMENT / capital-markets side. WHY THIS ONE: the prior seven primary-OIC anchors cover the financing side (Res 10 interest=riba, Res 40-41 murabaha), the deposit side (Res 86, Res 222) and the home-finance side (Res 110 lease-to-own); NONE covered how a Muslim's money can be put into a tradable security without it becoming an interest bond. Resolution No. 30 (5/4) is exactly that foundational ruling — the 'Muqaradah bond' / 'investment certificate', the direct ancestor of the modern sukuk — and it hands an ordinary reader a four-point halal-test for any 'Islamic bond'/'sukuk': (1) OWNERSHIP of a real venture, not a loan receipt; (2) NO capital guarantee, no fixed or percentage-of-capital return; (3) REAL profit only (the surplus after Tandeed/liquidation, not gross revenue or a coupon); (4) TRADABILITY governed by whether the capital is cash/debt (money-exchange/loan rules) or real assets (freely tradable). GEM: the anti-riba core (clause 4) is DIRECTLY sourced, not reasoned — the resolution itself voids any capital/fixed/percentage-of-capital guarantee, even one 'implied ... implicitly'. Grep-confirmed distinct before writing: `ls content/articles | grep -iE 'muqarad|30|investment-cert|sukuk|bond'` returned only the two general sukuk explainers (sukuk-asset-backed-capital-markets-alternative, uk-sovereign-sukuk), and a content grep for 'muqaradah'/'muqaradha'/'resolution no. 30'/'investment certificate'/'tandeed' across all articles returned NOTHING — distinct from both existing sukuk files (which cover general mechanics and one UK sovereign issuance, not this primary resolution). TWO GENUINELY DIFFERENT English translations of the SAME resolution cross-read — the GOLD-STANDARD pairing (same standard as the Res 110 entry): [1] the Academy's OWN OFFICIAL ENGLISH EDITION (Oct 2021 PDF), used as authoritative text, and [2] the older IRTI/IDB printed edition (1985-2000). Both are pre-2000-inclusive editions that carry this 1988 resolution in full, so the pairing is reproducible; the translations differ throughout (Bond vs Deed, tradable vs negotiable, 'Qirad contract' vs 'Qirad (Public Loan) contract', Muqaradah/Muqaradha, Mudarib/Mudharib), so the substance survives two independent renderings. ONE NUMBERING DIFFERENCE DISCLOSED, NOT HIDDEN (built into title/author/text/madhab/source): the predecessor 3rd-session resolution that ordered the seminar is cited 'no. 22 (10/3)' by the official edition and 'n 10/3' by IRTI — same predecessor resolution, two citation conventions (running-number+session-code vs session-code only), NOT a substantive conflict; reported as printed, with no claim made about that predecessor's content. TRUST 'high' (numbered/dated PRIMARY OIC resolution verified verbatim in the Academy's own official English edition and re-confirmed in a second, independently-worded printed edition; sole caveat = both are English translations, not the binding Arabic). DELIBERATELY DROPPED per no-fab: (a) any madhab-by-madhab breakdown or vote tally; (b) any hadith number; (c) the CONTENT of the cross-referenced predecessor Resolution No. 22 (10/3) beyond the cross-reference; (d) any market/AUM/named-fund figure; (e) any claim about which specific AU/UK/CA/US sukuk or fund complies (the four tests are given for the reader to apply, no product graded). The bridge to Resolution No. 137 (3/15) 'Sukuk al-Ijarah' (15th session, Muscat, 2004) is included because Res 137 explicitly restates this resolution's non-guarantee principle in the sukuk context; its quoted clause 8 was read verbatim from the same official IIFA edition and the Academy's own page and is the natural NEXT candidate for a dedicated entry once a genuinely different second source for it is secured (the IRTI/IDB edition stops at 2000 and does NOT contain Res 137, so a non-Academy independent reproduction is needed first). FRESHNESS-HONEST: a 1988 resolution — nothing time-sensitive; its date is stated explicitly, and the muqaradah-bond principles it lays down are still the live foundation of Islamic capital-markets practice. JSON-only per the established article convention (content/articles/*.json feed app/lib/corpus.ts via readdirSync + the /corpus stats badge + Phase-2 retrieval; NOT rendered as individual routed cards), so no SourceCard/route/href added and internal-link integrity is unaffected. Articles 71->72. PUNCH-LIST FULLY TICKED; build/lint re-confirmed green after this entry; this entry opens the FOURTH and final side of a bank's business (investment) in the corpus's primary-OIC coverage, alongside financing (Res 10, 40-41), deposits (Res 86, 222) and home finance (Res 110).
Topics
islamic-financeribaprohibition-of-ribainvestmentinvestment-sidecapital-marketsmuqaradahmuqaradhamuqaradah-bondmuqaradah-certificateinvestment-certificatemudarabahqiradmudaribsukukislamic-bondleasing-bondssukuk-al-ijarahresolution-30resolution-137capital-guaranteeno-guaranteefixed-profitfixed-dividendprofit-and-loss-sharingprofit-sharingtandeedliquidationtradabilitynegotiabilitysecondary-marketmoney-exchangesarfthird-party-guaranteereservewaqfendowmentistisnasubstance-over-formtrusteeamanahoicorganisation-of-islamic-cooperationinternational-islamic-fiqh-academyiifafiqh-academyprimary-sourcecollective-ijtihadshariah-rulingislamic-bankingjeddah-1988
This is source material, not a ruling. The corpus records what a named source actually said, so that you can read it yourself and take it to a scholar you trust. Ask the corpus to search all entries at once, or return to the library.