Title: Central Bank Scholar Warns: Neglecting Religious Edicts in Banking is a “Betrayal of Divine Trust”
In a powerful address to the financial sector, a senior member of the Central Bank’s Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) Council has issued a stark reminder of the religious and legal responsibilities underpinning Iran’s banking system, framing negligence as a profound breach of faith.
A Prophetic Mandate for Integrity
Alireza Eslamian, a member of the council, grounded his remarks in a prophetic tradition, emphasizing that knowledge is a divine trust and scholars are its custodians. He quoted the Hadith: “Whoever acts upon his knowledge has fulfilled his trust, and whoever does not is recorded among the treacherous by God.”
“This is not treachery in a mundane or contractual sense,” Eslamian stated. “It is a betrayal of the trust placed by God.” He drew a direct line between this theological principle and the modern legal concept of ‘negligence by omission,’ asserting that failing to implement the known rulings of the Fiqh Council, the Guardian Council, and the laws of the Islamic Republic constitutes this very betrayal.
Safeguarding the System: The Peril of “Guaranteed Loan” Schemes
A significant portion of the address focused on specific financial practices. Eslamian highlighted a recent discussion within the Fiqh Council concerning “preferential deposits”—schemes where banks promise a guaranteed loan in return for a customer’s deposit.
He was unequivocal: “Based on the explicit fatwa of the Supreme Leader, any bank commitment to grant a definitive loan in exchange for a deposit is considered usury (Riba). The implementation of such methods is a clear violation of the Fiqh Council’s resolutions.”
While noting that the “overwhelming majority” of banks do not engage in this practice, he identified a small number—three or four out of thirty—that continue to do so, in direct opposition to clear religious opinion.
A Call to Action for Sharia Supervisors
Directing his message to the Sharia supervisors within banks, whom he called “the trustees,” Eslamian reinforced their dual responsibility. “You are entrusted with the task of ensuring that what happens in banks complies with Sharia law. You have accepted this trust. Does inaction not make one among the treacherous?”
He urged for more effective customer education, stating that merely having a client sign a document is insufficient. “The customer must be fully informed that placing a deposit does not create an obligation for the bank to grant a loan. If there is no commitment from the bank, it is not usury. But if a commitment exists—whether written, oral, or implied—and the customer deposits money with the intention of receiving a loan, then usury is realized.”
A Manageable Path to Compliance
Countering potential objections about complexity, Eslamian argued that correct implementation is both feasible and low-cost. With modern technology reducing branch traffic, he suggested, bank employees have the capacity to properly educate the handful of clients they serve each day.
“The duty of the respected supervisors becomes even weightier here,” he concluded, “because the responsibility of trusteeship and ensuring the correct implementation of religious resolutions is both a legal duty and a divine one.”