اخبار و اعلانات
آمار
| تعداد نشریات | 20 |
| تعداد شماره‌ها | 542 |
| تعداد مقالات | 4,695 |
| تعداد مشاهده مقاله | 10,301,624 |
| تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله | 5,916,995 |
اوراق ودیعه در مرز قرض و اعتبار: «اعتباری نو در برابر زوال ارزش پول و شبهه ربا» | ||
| تحقیقات مالی اسلامی | ||
| مقاله 6، دوره 14، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 32، بهمن 1403، صفحه 403-430 اصل مقاله (1.02 M) | ||
| نوع مقاله: علمی - پژوهشی | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30497/ifr.2025.247241.1925 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| علیرضا علی‌نجیمی1؛ نصراله جعفری* 2؛ پگاه سرمدی3 | ||
| 1دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی ارشد حقوق خصوصی، گروه حقوق، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه میبد، یزد، ایران | ||
| 2دانشیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه میبد، یزد، ایران | ||
| 3استادیار، گروه حقوق، دانشکده الهیات و معارف اسلامی، دانشگاه میبد، یزد، ایران | ||
| چکیده | ||
| 1. مقدمه و هدف کنترل رشد نقدینگی و تورم از مهم‌ترین دغدغه‌های بانک مرکزی است. در همین راستا، انتشار اوراق جدیدی با عنوان «اوراق ودیعه» مطرح شده که به عنوان نهادی نوظهور در نظام بانکی کشور، نیازمند بررسی و تحلیل فقهی و حقوقی است. پرسش‌های اصلی پژوهش این است که اوراق ودیعه بانک مرکزی دارای چه ماهیتی هستند و با کدام یک از عقود متداول سازگاری دارند؟ همچنین این اوراق بر چه مبنایی می‌توانند با عقد ودیعه در قانون مدنی تطبیق یابند؟ 2. مواد و روش‌ها این پژوهش با روش توصیفی–تحلیلی انجام شده است. ابتدا نحوه انتشار اوراق ودیعه تبیین و سپس با اوراق مشابه مانند اوراق قرضه و اوراق مشارکت مقایسه گردید. در ادامه، مبانی فقهی و حقوقی این اوراق بررسی و چالش‌های پیش‌روی آن‌ها تحلیل شد. 3. یافته‌های تحقیق یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که منظور قانون‌گذار از «ودیعه گذاردن پول» در اوراق ودیعه، نه ارزش اسمی و عین اسکناس‌ها، بلکه ارزش حقیقی و اعتباری پول است. بر این اساس، ودیعه نوعی و اعتباری مد نظر بوده است. همچنین در موضوع اضافه پرداخت، ملاک ارزش حقیقی و قدرت خرید پول در نظر گرفته می‌شود و نه منفعت یا سود ثابت. 4. بحث و نتیجه‌گیری بررسی‌ها حاکی از آن است که اوراق ودیعه بیش از آن‌که ماهیتی مشابه قرض یا ودیعه سنتی داشته باشند، بر پایه ودیعه اعتباری طراحی شده‌اند. اضافه پرداخت در این اوراق به‌منزله سود واقعی نیست، بلکه جبران کاهش ارزش پول و حفظ قدرت خرید اولیه سپرده‌گذار تلقی می‌شود. از دیدگاه برخی مراجع تقلید، این جبران از شمول ربا خارج است، در حالی که برخی دیگر آن را واجد شبهه ربا می‌دانند. این یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که اوراق ودیعه در مرز میان قرض و اعتبار قرار دارند و تحلیل دقیق فقهی–حقوقی آن‌ها برای رفع ابهام‌های شرعی و عملیاتی ضروری است. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها | ||
| اوراق ودیعه؛ امانت؛ قرض؛ ودیعه نوعی؛ سپرده؛ بانک | ||
| عنوان مقاله [English] | ||
| Deposit Bonds at the Crossroads of Loan and Credit: A New Assurance Against the Erosion of Value with a Legal Perspective | ||
| نویسندگان [English] | ||
| Alireza Ali Najimi1؛ Nasrollah Jafari2؛ Pegah Sarmadi3 | ||
| 1M.A. in Private Law, Department of Law, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Meybod University, Yazd, Iran. | ||
| 2Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Meybod University, Yazd, Iran | ||
| 3Assistant Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Theology and Islamic Studies, Meybod University, Yazd, Iran | ||
| چکیده [English] | ||
| 1. Introduction and Objective The persistent problem of liquidity growth and inflation has become one of the most pressing challenges for monetary authorities in developing economies. In the Iranian financial system, the Central Bank has recently sought to address these issues through the introduction of Deposit Bonds (Orāq-e Vadiʿa). Unlike conventional interest-bearing securities, these bonds are designed to absorb excess liquidity while remaining compatible with Islamic jurisprudence, which prohibits usurious interest (ribā). Deposit Bonds represent a new institutional mechanism that does not fit neatly within established legal and jurisprudential categories. Their innovative character has generated considerable debate among scholars of Islamic law and civil law, raising essential questions: - What is the legal and jurisprudential nature of Deposit Bonds? - Can they be reconciled with classical contracts such as wadiʿa (deposit), qarż (loan), or ijāra (lease)? - How should the additional amount repaid at maturity—calculated to offset inflation—be interpreted in relation to the prohibition of ribā? The objective of this study is to provide a systematic jurisprudential–legal analysis of Deposit Bonds, situating them within the broader framework of Islamic finance, and clarifying whether they should be recognized as a new category or adapted to pre-existing legal constructs. 2. Methods and Materials The research employs a descriptive–analytical methodology, drawing upon both classical jurisprudential texts and contemporary regulatory documents. First, the operational framework of Deposit Bonds—as defined by the Central Bank of Iran and approved by the Shariʿah Supervisory Board—is outlined. This includes the process of issuance, the blocking of deposited funds until maturity, and the mechanism of inflation adjustment. Second, Deposit Bonds are compared with similar instruments, such as: - Conventional government bonds, which provide fixed interest payments. - Participation papers, whose returns are tied to investment performance. - Conventional deposit accounts, including current, savings, and fixed-term deposits. Third, the study incorporates jurisprudential sources: - Classical works such as Lisān al-ʿArab, al-Ṣiḥāḥ, al-Rawḍa al-Bahiyya, and Jawāhir al-Kalām. - Modern treatises and scholarly debates on banking contracts, including works by Mūsavī Khomeinī, Ṣadr, and contemporary Iranian jurists. Finally, secondary sources such as scholarly articles, doctoral theses, and fatwas are used to evaluate differing interpretations regarding inflation compensation, the meaning of wadiʿa iʿtibārī (credit deposit), and the boundaries of ribā. 3. Research Findings The study’s findings highlight several key points: (a) Distinction from Classical Wadiʿa Traditional wadiʿa requires the custodian to return the identical item deposited. Since Deposit Bonds involve the return of equivalent value adjusted for inflation—not the physical banknotes themselves—they cannot be equated with a strict wadiʿa. The funds are mixed with other deposits, making physical restitution impossible. (b) Partial Similarity to Qarż (Loan) Deposit Bonds resemble loans insofar as fungible money is transferred to the bank and later returned. However, unlike typical loans, the Central Bank may not use the deposited funds for investment or lending; the money is blocked. Furthermore, repayment includes an inflation adjustment, not as profit, but as preservation of real value. (c) Incompatibility with Ijāra (Lease) Attempts to interpret Deposit Bonds as a lease of money are rejected. Leases involve non-fungible assets whose usufruct does not destroy the asset. Money, being consumable, does not satisfy this requirement. (d) Classification as Wadiʿa Iʿtibārī (Credit Deposit) The most convincing characterization is that Deposit Bonds embody a wadiʿa iʿtibārī, in which the depositor entrusts not the physical currency but its monetary value. The bank guarantees to preserve and return this value, ensuring that purchasing power is restored at maturity. (e) Treatment of Additional Payment The inflation adjustment is not considered “interest” in the conventional sense. Instead, it restores the depositor’s original purchasing power. Supporters argue this is distinct from ribā because it prevents unjust loss rather than generating profit. Critics, however, caution that the resemblance to interest-bearing loans may foster ambiguity and suspicion. (f) Comparative Insights - Compared to current accounts, Deposit Bonds restrict usage of funds. - Compared to savings accounts, they ensure guaranteed inflation compensation rather than random prize distribution. - Compared to time deposits, they do not authorize bank investment in productive projects but instead block liquidity for monetary policy purposes. 4. Discussion and Conclusion The jurisprudential–legal analysis shows that Deposit Bonds occupy a unique and somewhat ambiguous space between loan and deposit contracts. They cannot be fully reconciled with classical definitions but may be justified through an expanded interpretation of wadiʿa that includes economic value (māliyya) as the object of safekeeping. From an economic policy perspective, Deposit Bonds provide the Central Bank with a Sharīʿah-compatible tool for absorbing excess liquidity and curbing inflation. By neutralizing the erosion of purchasing power, they respond to public concerns about fairness and financial justice. Yet, they simultaneously invite debate about the thin line separating lawful inflation compensation from prohibited usury. Two critical implications emerge: 1. Doctrinal Development: Islamic jurisprudence must address whether inflation adjustment constitutes legitimate compensation or veiled ribā. Consensus is lacking, and divergent fatwas indicate the need for further theoretical clarification. 2. Regulatory Safeguards: Practical legitimacy requires transparent indices for measuring inflation, consistent supervisory mechanisms, and clear contractual language to prevent abuse or misinterpretation. In conclusion, Deposit Bonds represent a cautious but significant innovation in Islamic financial law. They neither replicate conventional bonds nor entirely conform to classical contracts. Instead, they establish a new category that reconciles monetary policy needs with Sharīʿah compliance through the notion of a wadiʿa iʿtibārī. Their ultimate success will depend on jurisprudential acceptance, regulatory precision, and empirical validation of their effectiveness in stabilizing inflation and liquidity. | ||
| کلیدواژه‌ها [English] | ||
| Deposit Papers, Trust, Loan, General Deposit, Deposit, Bank | ||
| مراجع | ||
Reference
| ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 51 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 41 |
||