BY ASK GORA MOTA-ENDORSED BY QALAMUL HAQ
SANHA, after realizing that the public have smelt a rat, have attempted to save some face by releasing a statement which attempts to answer the objections made.
The points made by SANHA in a nutshell are
*SANHA is not money orientated as they defended Cadbury even though they had no contract with them in the past
*Claimed that the basis of the dramatic statement was only due to the wine connotations and they didn’t state it as Haraam all they said was exercise caution.
*Didn’t wish to breach Amaana and feared legal implications therefore kept vital information away from the public
OUR RESPONSE
The claim of SANHA of being altruistic and being unconcerned regarding monetary gain is laughable, they might as well carry out their duties as a charity work, they would ofcourse give us stories of how nothing in life is free and everything has costs which cannot be covered when being done in this sense,however we are all certain that the cash benefits are well over and above cost.
Defending Cadbury without a contract doesn’t necessitate selfless service, defending an entity could be done with the hope of luring them to become clients. We can only imagine the despair when a fellow halaal body shatters one’s dreams.
We are not understanding the stance of SANHA in the light of Shariah, the Shariah allows the usage of vinegar that is made from wine despite it being derived from a wine source, are SANHA becoming more pious then the Shariah itself?What exactly is there view regarding tabdeel E maahiyat ie metemorphisis in this context?
This breach of Amaana story is laughable, is the” Amaanat”of a non Muslim company more important then the Amaanah of the entire Muslim community of South Africa?
The Shariah concept of Amaanah is being misapplied, to expose a matter of concern to the public is not contrary to Amaanah.
The legal excuse is baseless, one has a moral obligation to bring these matters out in the public sphere, this was done before by SANHA. There are no legal repercussions for doing such. It is surprising that SANHAs legal concerns had been abated the moment NIHT became the halaal authority that certifies Cadbury.
In essence it would be better if SANHA remains silent, we dont like taking out time to expose fallacies, but when a statement with such hogwash is released we feel constrained to respond.