Answer: According to Islam, a contract between a lender and
borrower should be an equitable one. It should ensure justice to both parties
and safeguard their rights on equal footings. If one party’s interest is
protected more than the other even minutely, injustice creeps in. In a Ribā
(interest) contract, justice to both parties is not ensured. While the lender is
ensured a safe return, the borrower is not -- and the lender is least bothered
with it. This is unethical. Various measures have been suggested by economists
that reduce risk for the lender. All said and done, these measures may be
efficient, but the fact remains that they do not ensure equal justice to both
parties. Injustice, you’ll agree, is something very objectionable and cannot be
tolerated at any level.
The fact that a
certain unjust act might cause an economic boom is not reason enough that it
should be legalized. There are many practices which may be ethically incorrect
but which may boost the economy of a country. Drug trafficking and smuggling for
example can be very beneficial for a country. Similarly, in the far eastern
countries, child pornography is a very lucrative way of earning. In some African
countries, slave trading is very profitable. So you see that if a thing is
economically profitable, it does not necessarily mean that it is morally
correct. Interest is prohibited because of the fact that it is an unethical
contract. You would perhaps agree that economic boom is only commendable if it
is based on ethical contracts.
|