I will disappoint the readers who are expecting to see part 3
of 2012 Democracy Day Church Service on this page today, by
discussing the above topic in relation to a broadcast that this anti-Islam
station aired penultimate Monday in its FOCUS NIGERIA programme
concerning Islamic Banking. I will resume my discourse on the church service
afterwards.
The programme, in the words of the anchor, Mr Gbenga
Aruleba, was centred on the legal ‘pronouncement of a Federal High Court
in Abuja on the constitutionality or otherwise of the Islamic banking system.
According to Justice Gabriel Kolawole, this runs contrary to the spirit
and letter of the Nigerian Constitution.’
In the AIT studios to discuss this sensitive subject matter,
on the one hand, was one Elder David Ogu, a former commissioner with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); he is also an investment
banker. And on the other was Ben-Bright Mpukma, ‘a professional
colleague’ of Gbenga’s, a ‘publisher and Editor-in-Chief of Watchdog
Reporters.’
So, from the outset, from the composition of the panel, it
was apparent that Anti Islam Television (AIT) was set to do their inherent
occupation: presentation of biased position, perversion of facts and rendering
subjective analyses against Islam. The opinion expressed by this one-sided,
all-Christian and non-expert panel reminded the viewer of the verse: ‘Hatred
is revealed by the utterance of their mouths, but that which their hearts
conceal is greater.’ (Qur’an 3:118). Who was expecting AIT to invite
an expert in Islamic banking in order to educate and present a balanced
standpoint on the issue? What do you anticipate from the Anti Islam Television?
Both the discussants and the presenter of the programme ended up leaving no one
with any knowledge of the subject matter in doubt as to their unfamiliarity
with the concept and modus operandi of the Islamic Financial System.
The attack was first directed at the CBN Governor, Sanusi
Lamido Sanusi, for ‘promoting a purely religious financial institution,
because ‘Christians can rise up and say we need a Christian bank, and atheists
can rise up and say we need atheist bank.’ Why should CBN be the one to promote
‘Ja’iz Bank? The bank has never made any advert until tomorrow….’
The AIT panel does not know the difference between a promoter
and a regulator. In carrying out its statutory responsibility of licensing,
regulating and supervising all forms of banking business in Nigeria allowed by
the law, the CBN is duty-bound to maintain ‘public confidence in the banking
industry’ and ‘to create public awareness of this new banking model and
product.’ Our learned AIT discussants confused awareness-generation with
advocacy! The only reason Sanusi had to vehemently defend the CBN’s decision
was when it was apparent that there was an agenda at play; the now familiar
give-a-dog-a-bad-name-to-hang-it routine that greeted the introduction of
Shari’ah in Northern Nigeria was playing out again. Never mind the merits or
constitutionality of it.
There was a similar incident in Germany during the second BAFIN
Conference of 10th May, 2012 in Frankfurt. The German Financial Authority was
attacked for ‘promoting and marketing Islamic financial products; that such
exercise should be left for the affected banks and institutions to do it by
themselves. As if one is quoting verbatim from the AIT programme under
discussion. ‘We need to express interest in Islamic finance’, answered Peter
Baier of the German Financial Authority, ‘because as regulators, we have to
open up to new developments in global financial landscape in which Islamic
finance is one such new developments, and it is gaining a lot of relevance in
Europe. It is not a matter of promotion; it is a matter of waking up to our
responsibilities as supervisors and regulators.’ How instructive! Even Sanusi
could not have added anything to this succinct response.
On the allegation of Ja’iz Bank not making any advert ‘until
tomorrow’ as put forward by Ben-Bright, it is sad that Gbenga refused to be
guided by his professional honesty, if he has any left, in refuting this for
the fact that Ja’iz Bank has placed numberless advertisements on both print and
electronic media. Will it be that keeping mute on this aspect of Ja’iz’s
activities was part of the contract signed between AIT and the covert sponsors
of that programme? Why did Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) place paid
advertorials on national dailies, just 2 days after this infamous AIT
programme, praising and anointing Justice Gabriel Kolawole (a Christian, by the
way) for his judgement against Islamic banking? Is there an unbroken chain of
strategy aimed at nipping Ja’iz Bank in the court judgement being a precursor
to the AIT programme and then the spiritual merit award by CAN in paid
advertorials to the Justice for his pronouncement?
Gbenga spoke on disparity between Soludo’s guidelines on
non-interest banking ‘and not an Islamic one’, and those of Sanusi… who,
according to Gbenga, ‘brought a different guideline with a religious cloak.’
The presenter then put a question to Elder David, ‘Is there any difference
between non-interest bank and a Shariah compliant bank?’
Elder David’s response only emphasised his hatred for the
system, and not answer the question. ‘Such products’, he said, ‘should
be killed on the first day. What do you mean by non-interest? Even some
Muslims have been receiving interest in their deposits from Nigerian banks.’
Let me help Elder David. The guidelines Gbenga was referring
to were two documents one drafted during Soludo’s tenure, and the other, an
improvement on the draft during Sanusi’s tenure. What Gbenga does not know is
that Soludo’s draft has more Islamic content than Sanusi’s amended version, and
not the other way round. Gbenga has either not read the said guidelines or has
chosen to be mischievous by distorting the contents. Soludo’s draft did not
recognise any non-interest banking other than that of ‘Shari’ah banking
system.’ It was Sanusi’s revised standard version that re-defined
‘Non-Interest Banking as a universal set, with two subsets viz: non-interest
Islamic banking and non-Islamic non-interest banking’ in order to be more
encompassing and accommodating to other options in case the Christians, the
Jews or for that matter, the atheists for instance, wish to have their own
workable and established financial system. Of course we know there is no such
thing in their religion; all the same let us be fair to all.
Sanusi also removed ‘Shari’ah due to sensitivities, and’
substituted ‘it with Islamic commercial jurisprudence.’ In addition, Shariah
Advisory Committees provided by the framework for every non-interest
financial institution was substituted with Advisory Committees of Experts
for the same reason. Gbenga should therefore
study his notes very well to avoid exposing his poor education or the lack of
it on this matter to the whole world.
When asked the question on the difference between
non-interest bank and Islamic bank Ben-Bright did better by saying ‘It is the
same.’ But Elder David interjected and said ‘It’s better to encourage already
existing banks to have “ethical products” than to have a bank
established specifically for the purpose.’
Obviously, it is the word Islam that he does not want
to be part of the appellation. But even Ja’iz Bank does not call itself Islamic
either. There is no place that the word Islamic appears in either
its cheque book or deposit slip. The Bank and Other Financial Institutions Act
(BOFIA) of 1991 (as amended) states that: ‘without the written consent
of the CBN Governor’ no bank may be incorporated or registered under the name
Islamic, Christian, Qur’anic or Biblical etc.’ What is interesting here is that
though this act empowers the CBN Governor to grant his written assent for Ja’iz
Islamic Bank, for example, Sanusi did not do that. The bank remains
only as Ja’iz Bank. Our uninformed panel, from the beginning to the end
of the programme kept referring to Ja’iz as Ja’iz Islamic Bank which is
not the registered name of the bank!
Though Elder David was a commissioner in SEC he is ignorant
of the fact that the CBN is not alone in allowing banks to go into the realm of
Islamic finance. NAICOM has licensed up to three insurance institutions to
provide Islamic insurance services called Takaaful. SEC has also
licensed Islamic fund management entities and has released the rules governing
the operation of Islamic funds. Conventional banks are also venturing into this
realm. Alongside Ja’iz, the CBN has also licensed Stanbic IBTC Plc to
set up a window for non-interest (Islamic) banking services, in line with what
obtains in ‘major western international financial institutions’ which ‘include
HSBC, Citigroup, Standard Chartered, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, Lloyds Banking
Group, Tokyo Marine Insurance, Swiss Re etc.’ I am sure these banks are not
owned by Muslims nor are the heads of their central banks Muslims.
Still on the name,
Elder David said ‘We should call it non-interest or ethical. That is what is
used all over the world.’ This is false! It is true that Turkey refers to
Islamic banks as Participation Banks; and Saudi Arabia does not allow a
bank to call itself Islamic because it does not want the name of Islam to be
used in a commercial sense, even though it has Islamic banks like Al
Jazeerah Bank, Al Bilad Bank, Al Rajihi, etc all operating the Islamic banking
system. All other countries where these kinds of institutions are in operation
refer to these banks as Islamic banks. These countries include
the UK (which is the 8th country in the world in terms of Islamic finance
assets), Switzerland, Luxembourg, Germany and France. In Africa, there are
Islamic banks in Kenya, Tanzania, Uganda, Botswana, South Africa, Mauritius,
Senegal, Gambia, Mauritania, Benin, Niger etc. In Asia, outside the Muslim
majority countries it is offered in Singapore, Thailand, Hong Kong, Sri Lanka,
Japan and South Korea. It is also offered in the US and Australia’, in myriad
names, so, what is wrong with the name Ja’iz Bank? All any
half-educated, semi-literate man has to do is “Google” what I am claiming here
to confirm or refute them. In fact, the
Islamic Bank of Britain is well-known in London as it has a
branch on the popular Edgware Road shown here:
ISLAMIC BANK OF BRITAIN
Another allegation was that of text-messages announcing
recruitment purportedly sent by Ja’iz Bank to Muslims and urging them to
‘forward only to Muslim brothers and Sisters.’ Unfortunately, our AIT panel was
not honest enough to state that Ja’iz Bank has responded swiftly to disown that
text-message and urged recipients to disregard it. Muslims and non-Muslims are
welcome to Ja’iz Bank; nobody is discriminated against. Part of the amendments
of Sanusi on Soludo’s draft was the inclusion of ‘a non-discrimination clause’
to inhibit such non-interest banks from discriminating against anybody on the
basis of religion or ethnicity. This clause says that: no person shall on
account of his race, religion or geographical location be discriminated against
by these institutions whether as promoter, shareholder, employee or
customer. Let the Anti-Islam Television
produce proof of anyone that suffers any form of discrimination on account of
their faith; I trust the CBN is sure to impose sanction as this is against the
regulation establishing the bank.
The truth, the Arabs say, is what even the enemy affirms.
AIT’s anti-Islamic banking panel had to admit, in spite of itself, that ‘it is
beneficial to a section of our society’ like ‘our brothers in the South East
who cannot cope with the rigours of conventional banks due to high interest
rate, can benefit from non-interest bank’; that there are 75 countries where
435 institutions are operating Islamic banking system’; so, ‘that means it is
something that has merit.’ Gbenga then put the question ‘What do we need to do
here that will make our own as beneficial to our economy as it is doing to economies
around the world?’
The response: it is working elsewhere because, according to
Elder David, ‘their manpower is trained to understand the characteristics of
the product.’ And for the first time, I agree with Elder David, and the CBN is
aiming at exactly the same thing by making it part of the guidelines that our
banks must sign at least a 3 year technical agreement with another bank already
in the field. To this end Ja’iz has ratified a technical working agreement with
the Islamic Bank of Bangladesh (IBBL). As for Stanbic IBTC, it
does not have to sign any such contract due to its experience in Islamic bank
operations in Tanzania, South Africa among other countries.
The AIT panel concluded that ‘Islamic bank cannot survive in
this country; because it does not ‘fix profit because it is not religiously
prudent’; the principle of ‘profit and loss sharing’ of Islamic bank will not
succeed in the Nigerian setting. ‘That is what we’ve been telling them…’ said
Elder David, ‘profit sharing in a loosely religious sentimental situation is a
recipe for disaster. Unless you are chief accountant of the borrower’, you
cannot monitor the capital. That is what made ‘such Islamic banks found it
difficult for a very long time to raise equity, because nobody believed in what
they are trying to do. If a bank that charges interest can go under, how about
one that is socialistic in nature, in a capitalist country? It will create
further risks in the banking system.’
This is only the ranting of self-acclaimed soothsayers of doom
for Islamic banks in Nigeria. If these banks are billed to go under because of
the nature of the model under which they operate which is based principally on
profit and loss sharing, how come Islamic banks all over the world are
registering an average growth rate of 10-15% in assets, deposits and customer
base, at a time when most conventional banks are growing at only single digit
rates of growth? From a few billions, the global assets of Islamic financial institutions have hit
the USD 1 trillion mark and are expected to reach USD 1.8 trillion by the end
of this year! Islamic banking is a business enterprise not a socialistic or
philanthropic venture as this misinformed panel misperceived. Allow the people
who want to do the business to do it. It is their money.
The CBN as a regulator knows from its expertise in banking
regulation that this is a viable banking business that is why it is licensing
it. Let me here paraphrase Charles Darwin, “It is not the strongest financial
system that survives, nor the most intelligent. It is the one that is most
adaptable to change.” Strangely enough, the man responsible for drafting the
amended guidelines is a staunch Christian. The decision to adopt all those
policies and guidelines was also ratified at the highest level of the CBN where
matters are put to the vote and where the Christians outnumber the Muslims. Of
course these facts are carefully kept away from those they wish to misinform.
A lot of the negative projection of anything Islamic in this
country is based on Islamophobia. Why can we not live and let others also live?
