SANHA’S HARAAM FLEECING FEES OF EXTORTION AND A CORRUPT FATWA

SANHA’S HARAAM FLEECING FEES OF EXTORTION AND A CORRUPT FATWA

QUESTION: I am sending you a fatwa for viewing and comment. According to the fatwa, all the fees charged by SANHA for halaalizing products are permissible. The fatwa is somewhat disturbing. Please comment.

 

ANSWER:

At the outset, it must be emphasized that SANHA does not provide any valid service to either the Muslim community or to individual traders. Certifying maitah (carrion) which is haraam is never a service accepted in Islam. On the contrary, the consequence of such a corrupt, haraam imagined ‘service’ is the Fire of Jahannum. Thus, all fees charged by SANHA are haraam. These fees consist of:

1. Money extracted from traders for so-called ‘halaal’ certificates and mock inspections of the premises.

2. Money which the kuffaar chicken plants have to pay for halaalizing their carrion.

 

Since the entire SANHA operation is Islamically fraudulent, misleading and deceptive, it is haraam, hence all the money which SANHA acquires from traders and chicken plants is haraam.

 

It is extremely short-sighted, to say the least, that there exists a valid Shar’i Ijaarah contract between SANHA and the traders, and SANHA and the carrion chicken plants. This is the fundamental error in the ‘fatwa’.

Whilst this is the factual position, let us now make the stupid and baseless assumption that the chickens are ‘halaal’. Should this be the case, then too, there is no valid Ijaarah contract. Sending a person to inspect the premises to ensure that haraam products are not stocked is not a duty which the trader imposes on SANHA. It is not a service ordered by the trader. It is an obligation on the one who issues the certificate to ensure that violations are not committed. Thus, SANHA will be acting as a government inspector or as a policeman. The police department cannot impose a fee on a person or institution for any inspection its officers undertake to ensure that the trader/institution does not deal in drugs or rotten pork, etc.

 

If the government’s health inspector regularly inspects the shops of traders to ensure that they do not sell rotten carrion, the health department cannot demand a fee for such inspections. They are merely fulfilling their duty by making the inspection. In exactly the same way, SANHA will be merely executing its duty to ensure that the terms of its carrion certificate are being complied with.

 

The expenses which SANHA incurs in making inspections have to be borne solely by the carrion purveyor itself. No trader who surreptitiously sells haraam meat will be happy with any inspection of his premises. This confirms that the inspector is the worker of SANHA, not of the trader who holds the carrion certificate. It is palpably clear that the fees SANHA extracts from traders are acquired without their happy consent. They pay against their wishes. Islamically it is extortion.

 

Traders pay the fees because they are stupid and feel pressurized by the Carrion Purveyor. Since their Imaan is deficient, they believe that their Rizq will be curtailed if SANHA spreads the rumour that their products are not halaal. SANHA has resorted to this type of innuendo thuggery to diminish confidence in traders who refuse to submit to SANHA’s ‘halaal’ certificate pressurization and demand for haraam fees which according to the Shariah is extortion. There are many traders who will vouch for this haraam attitude and action of SANHA.

 

If for example, SANHA’s sister carrion outfit, NIHT or MJC, despatches its inspector to inspect SANHA-certified outlets, it (i.e. NIHT or MJC) cannot impose a fee on the traders whom they are investigating/inspecting with the motive of stabbing their carrion competitor in the back with blackmailing disclosures. One such example is an inspection undertaken by NIHT of ANCA, a SANHA-certified carrion chicken plant. The NIHT inspectors discovered gross malpractices which confirmed ANCA chickens to be haraam carrion. The cost of this inspection was borne by NIHT itself. Although NIHT also extracts haraam boodle from traders, nevertheless, it could not claim inspection fees from Anca for the simple reason that NIHT did not render any service ordered by ANCA.

 

Another notorious example is SANHA itself. SANHA had clandestinely carried out ‘under-cover’ inspections of a range of MJC-certified carrion plants and other outlets. SANHA’s diligent inspections of its opposition, had established that the products of the MJC-certified plants were indeed haraam carrion. In this regard, SANHA had issued a secret 220-page document which it had used to blackmail and maul the MJC. The two carrion halaalizers were involved in a desperate turf war when SANHA attempted to steal a slice from the MJC’s haraam boodle pie.

 

SANHA could not levy charges on the MJC for having conducted inspections of its plant nor on the carrion plants because the inspections were services to promote the carrion interests of the Carrion Halaalizer (SANHA).

 

Similarly, if The Majlis sends an inspector to a SANHA-certified restaurant to ascertain a complaint of halaalized pork being stocked, it (The Majlis) cannot charge the pork-selling SANHA-certified restaurant a fee and argue that the fee is in lieu of a service.

 

Since the inspecting organization is carrying out inspections in the interests of its own agenda, there is no ma’qood alayh for contracting a valid Ijaarah agreement. The claim of Ijaarah in the fatwa is pure bunkum. Inspection is an external imposition – imposed by the carrion outfit. It is not a service trquired by the trader for which he is happily prepared to pay a fee, e.g. paying a worker for cleaning his shop. No trader is happy to pay a stupid SANHA inspector for the nuisance of a silly mock ‘inspection’ which is devoid of Shar’i substance, and which is imposed on the trader against his will by the carrion vendor.

 

Thus, the Mufti’s statement: “SANHA is an organization which provides a service of certifying a certain product or outlet as Halal.”, is baseless. As explained earlier SANHA’s role is not as a worker of the outlet or of the carrion chicken plant. SANHA’s role is that of an oppressive imposer of zulm. Its sole objective is to suck boodle from traders and from the killing plants.

 

It is ludicrous to charge a fee for proclaiming that the products of a Muslim are halaal. This proclamation is not a ‘service’ which could be remunerable. It is not a ma’qood alayh in terms of the Shariah.

 

The Mufti says that if a person wants a halaal certificate, he ‘approaches SANHA and SANHA provides him with a supervisor whose job is to inspect that all products used in the outlet are certified by SANHA.” Either the Mufti is genuinely ignorant of SANHA’s haraam Mafia-style operation or he is intentionally providing SANHA with Deeni cover for its carrion products on the basis of some corrupt ta-alluq he enjoys with the carrion vendor.

 

It is indeed lamentable that the Mufti has degenerated to a level unbecoming of even a layman who understands how SANHA operates. Firstly, it is a blatant lie that SANHA provides every outlet with a supervisor. There is no 24 hour supervisor any where in any of the halaalized carrion plants and certified shops and restaurants. Further, if we assume that SANHA does provide a permanent supervisor to a restaurant, then that supervisor is SANHA’s employee. He is not the employee of the trader. The supervisor takes instructions from the Mafia, not from the owner of the shop. It is crystal clear that the supervisor is in the employ of SANHA, hence he reports to SANHA, and it is his duty to work on the premises to serve SANHA’s haraam boodle interests or to execute SANHA’s haraam orders.

 

If the owner of the shop requests the supervisor to clean the toilet or not to divulge to SANHA any haraam product he may be selling, the supervisor will be under SANHA’s obligation to reject the demands of the shop’s owner.

 

However, despite the supervisor being in reality SANHA’s employee, the carrion plant (Rainbow) is forced to pay the supervisor a salary. For the sake of the ‘halaal’ carrion certificate, Rainbow and others submit to this extortion and pay SANHA’s supervisor’s wages. This compounds the extortion and emphasizes the non-existence of a valid Shar’i ma’qood alayh as a subject for a valid Ijaarah contract.

 

How can SANHA charge fees for ‘supervision’ when Rainbow is paying the salary of the supervisor. Thus, supervision fees are a vulgar canard proffered by SANHA to deceive an ignorant Muslim public. It incurs no ‘supervision’ expenses.

 

The stupid fatwa further says: “The SANHA team also inspects the outlets regularly to ensure that no Haram products are utilized in the outlet. They charge him a monthly fee for these services.”

 

That a mufti would issue such a corrupt, utterly baseless and unprofessional ‘fatwa’ defies credulity. What is the ma’qood alayh here for an Ijaarah transaction? SANHA performs a service at its own initiation, leisure and pleasure in the interests of its own carrion and boodle agenda and imposes a fee on the trader for a ‘service’ designed by it (i.e. by SANHA). This is not a service ordered by the trader. It is an imposition by an outsider – by a carrion outfit – yet the trader is extorted for a fee, then the mufti says that this extortion is halaal ujrat (wage). The ‘service’ on which the mufti basis his ‘fatwa’ is a product of hallucination – hallucinated to give a semblance of Shar’i permissibility for SANHA’s extortion and corrupt carrion industry. It is only a mufti maajin who issues such corrupt ‘fatwas’ which have no head, no legs and no tail.

 

The Mufti states: “It is permissible for them to charge the fee per carcass as there is no ambiguity in the fee.” Assuming that there is truly no ambiguity, then too, it is absolutely corrupt and baatil to charge a baatil fee per carcass. For what is this fee? The fee per carcass per se is baatil. What service does SANHA perform for a carrion plant, e.g. Rainbow, to warrant a fee? If it is claimed that the fee is for conducting inspections, then such inspections are not services ordered by Rainbow.

 

In fact, the carrion plant will be too happy if the Carrion Clique does not appear on the plant to create a nuisance. If the municipality’s health inspectors visit Rainbow’s plant to inspect if health regulations are complied with, the municipality cannot and does not levy a fee for such inspections. SANHA is in exactly the same capacity. It performs a hallucinated ‘service’ for its own ends, for which SANHA extorts money from Rainbow. Furthermore, the carrion chicken plant pays separate ‘inspection’ fees, apart from haraam ‘license’ fees, carcasses fees and other fleecing fees which shall be explained further on.

 

SANHA levies different types of extortionist fees on Rainbow, etc. Inspection fees are charged separately. Under different headings, SANHA charges a variety of fees which are all haraam. The very bottom line is that the ‘services’ which SANHA purportedly performs for traders and carrion chicken plants are not services of the traders. If for argument’s sake it be conceded that these mock ‘inspections’ are services, then the latter will be services for the SANHA clique, not for the traders nor for the carrion plants.

 

The contention that there is no ambiguity in levying a fee per carcass is also an insult to intelligence. The number of carcasses differ on a daily basis. In addition, a fee cannot be charged per carcass because SANHA is not slaughtering nor cleaning nor packing nor transporting the carcasses. Those who are killing the animals are paid a wage for their killing services, and those who are cleaning and packing the carcasses are paid a fixed wage for their services. Now what is the meaning of a ‘service’ levy’ per carcass – a haraam riba extortionist fee – charged by the carrion clique? What Shar’i basis is there for this confounded haraam tax?

 

The ‘fatwa’ displays gross ignorance of the methods of SANHA’s mafia-style operation regarding its fees to fleece, and Fees Cost Structure. The “monthly fee for services” which according to the fatwa is permissible, is not the whole story of the Fleecing Structure. SANHA does not charge a simple, straightforward, flat monthly fee for its ‘services’. Although these ‘services’ are not genuine services of the carrion chicken plant, we shall temporarily regard the charges as such for pursuing this argument to disprove the validity of the fleecing fees in terms of the Shariah.

 

The Fleecing Fees extorted by SANHA from Rainbow Carrion Chickens consist of the following elements:

(a) “The cost of any publicity advertisement, notices (including handbills) and announcements shall be for the account of the Fleecee (i.e. the fleeced Rainbow Carrion Chicken Co.).” In its agreement with Rainbow, the Carrion Purveyor, SANHA, has designated Rainbow as the ‘Licensee’ while we have appropriately labelled the Company, the Fleecee, that is, an entity who is fleeced of its money in haraam ways which in terms of the Shariah are extortion.

 

So, while SANHA incurs expenses regarding its publicity stunts, it loads the expense on the Fleecee. This is haraam even with the agreement of the Fleecee. Since the Fleecee is desperate for the ‘halaal’ carrion certificate to market its Carrion chickens, it submits under duress to this haraam imposition of charges for the publicity stunts of SANHA.

 

(b) With regard to inspection fees, the following is the Fleecing Fees Cost Structure:

(i) Some years ago SANHA charged Rainbow, a Fleecing licence fee of approximately R10,000 per month. What the current amount is, is anyone’s guess.

 

What is this ‘licence’ fee all about? What Shar’i basis is there for claiming validity and permissibility for this haraam fleecing monthly charge dubbed ‘licence’ fee? What is the purpose of this fleecing fee? The only purpose is to fill in a haraam manner the pockets of men suffering from inordinate greed for haraam boodle.

 

These carrion-halaalizers survive on haraam. Their bodies are nourished with haraam, hence their brains see only good in haraam. It is pure extortion since there is absolutely no ma’qood alayh for this fleecing ‘license’ fee to be a valid charge. There is much more to say on this haraam boodle fleecing of SANHA.

20 Rabiul-Awwaal 1445 – 6 October 2023