The study deals with the suspicion s relied upon by those who admit the issue of investment certificates. The suspicions are: I - Plea of interest: an argument which cannot be accepted because the interest is considered to be a plea only if we are short of a text, while usury is prohibited by conclusive texts. 2 - Plea of prevailing custom: a weak argument too because a reck­oned custom is that which has been prevailing at the time of the descent of The Qur'an . A contingent custom at variance with a le­gal text cannot be relied upon. 3 - Plea of need and exigency : but the authorization of acting because of need and exigency is an extraordinary exception arising from the circumstances of the person authorized; and it does not consti­tute a public transacting system. 4 - Plea of "no usury between a state and its citizens”: an unaccept­able argument because it is no more than an unestablished evi­dence, as long as the state citizens are subject to the same rules. 5 - Plea of difference bet ween a consumable and a productive loan: an argument which can be rebutted by remembering that prohibit­ ting texts are common and i t is very difficult to differentiate be­ tween the two categories of loan s i n practice . 6 - Plea of Prohibiting usury only and not 'mere interest' : an un­ acceptable argument also as true hadiths admonished "interest" ir­respective of its amount. 7 - Plea of circumscribing prohibition on Jahilia interest only i.e. the excess of debt on maturity date as a consequence of the inabili­ty of the debtor to pay. This argument can be rebutted also by indication that the criterion is the generality of term and not the exclusivity of cause. 8 - Plea of prohibiting 'sales interest' only 'as this is the only interest referred to in Al-Sonnah' : an argument which can be rebut­ ted by denoting that a debt interest is mentioned in both Qur'an and Sun nah. The writer concludes his study by considering investment certifi­cates to be a type of illegal usury.

Included in

Jurisprudence Commons