The corpus already carries the OIC's ruling on istiṣnāʿ as a standalone sale (Res 65) and on penalty clauses (Res 109)
The corpus already carries the OIC's ruling on istiṣnāʿ as a standalone sale (Res 65) and on penalty clauses (Res 109) — but not the framework that ties them into a working construction contract. Resolution No. 129 (3/14) 'Manufacturing and Construction Contracts: Essence, Characterization, and Forms' is that framework: the Academy's sixteen-head ruling on how a Muslim can commission the making or building of an asset — a house, a factory, an infrastructure project — for a price that may be paid up front, deferred, or by installments, with a penalty clause and defined liability, and with no interest-bearing loan anywhere in the structure. It is the contract beneath halal construction finance, as distinct from the halal purchase finance already in the corpus.
What this source says
THE CONTRACT BENEATH HALAL CONSTRUCTION FINANCE. The corpus already carries the pieces: Resolution No. 65 (3/7) rules on istiṣnāʿ as a sale of something not yet made, and Resolution No. 109 (3/12) rules on the penalty clause that disciplines late or defective delivery. What it did not carry was the resolution that assembles those pieces into a whole, working contract for MAKING or BUILDING something to order — the contract a Muslim uses to have a house constructed, a factory tooled, or a road built without ever taking an interest-bearing loan. Resolution No. 129 (3/14) 'Manufacturing and Construction Contracts: Essence, Characterization, and Forms' is that resolution. It 'Resolves' across sixteen numbered heads and closes with a Recommendation — a settled, operative ruling, not a deferral.
WHAT THE CONTRACT IS (HEADS 1-3). The Academy defines it by function and immediately splits it in two: 'A manufacturing contract is a contract according to which one party undertakes to manufacture something or perform a task against a specific amount that the other party undertakes to pay. It is a permissible contract whether the manufacturer is to provide both the work and the raw material – and in this case, the contract is called by Fuqahā, an Istiṣnā contract – or the manufacturer is to provide the work only, which is the case of Ijāra contract according to Fuqahā.' That single sentence is the whole taxonomy. If the maker supplies the materials AND the labour, you are in istiṣnāʿ, and 'When the manufacturer provides raw material and work, the contract becomes subject to the Academy resolution no. 65 (3/7) on Istiṣnā.' — Res 129 does not re-legislate istiṣnāʿ, it points at the resolution the corpus already holds. If the maker supplies only the labour (you provide the materials), it is a hire of services — an ijāra — and then 'When the manufacturer provides work only, the reward should be pre-determined.' The riba-free reader should note what is NOT here: no lender, no interest, no financing charge. The price is a price for a made thing or a done task, full stop.
HOW THE PRICE MAY BE FIXED (HEAD 4). This is where a construction contract usually goes wrong under Shariah — an unknown price is gharar (fatal uncertainty). Res 129 permits three, and only three, ways to pin it down: 'Agreement on the determination of the price is permissible to be in any of the following ways:' (a) 'Agreement to a total price based on the tender documents, designs and specifications that have been precisely specified.' — a lump-sum against a precise spec; (b) 'Agreement on the price per a specific standard unit with agreed-upon drawings and designs to be applied the quantity.' — a unit rate against agreed drawings; and (c) 'Agreement to determine the price based on the actual cost plus a definite percentage as profit. In this case, the manufacturer/contractor should present detailed accounts and lists that clearly tabulate his actual cost according to specifications so that these can be used for calculating the contract’s value of cost-plus.' — cost-plus, but only if the contractor opens his books. Each of the three removes the uncertainty a different way; the resolution names no rate and no figure — 'a definite percentage as profit' is a method, agreed between the parties, not a number the Academy fixes.
LATE DELIVERY, AND DEFERRED PAYMENT (HEADS 5-6). Two heads matter most to anyone using this to finance a build. On the maker's side, 'A manufacturing contract may include a penalty clause to enforce fulfillment of what has been agreed upon, except in case of force majeure. In this connection, Academy resolution no. 109 (3/12) on Penalty Clause should be applied.' — again a pointer to the corpus's existing ruling, not a re-statement of it. On the buyer's side sits the head that makes this a FINANCING instrument and not merely a service contract: 'It is permissible in manufacturing contracts to postpone payment of the contract price or make it payable in installments at pre-determined maturities or in accordance with dates’ performance phases.' Read that carefully. The price may be DEFERRED, or paid in INSTALLMENTS tied to construction milestones — and it is still halal, because the deferral is of the PRICE OF A MADE THING, not the repayment of a loan at interest. That is the whole mechanism by which an Islamic bank can fund a construction project: it commissions the asset under istiṣnāʿ, pays the builder, and is repaid the deferred price by the customer in installments — a sale, not a loan.
AMENDMENTS, SUB-CONTRACTING, LIABILITY (HEADS 7-16). The remaining heads make the contract usable in the real world. Amendments are allowed by agreement — 'It is permissible to agree on amendments and additions to the contract.' — with the resolution then distinguishing changes made with the owner's permission (compensated at the rate of similar works) from changes made without it (uncompensated). The maker carries real responsibility for the outcome: 'The manufacturer should be liable for indemnity in cases of infringement, negligence, or breach of contract on his part and for defects and mistakes he causes.' The resolution allows sub-contracting unless the owner stipulated the maker do the work personally, and holds the maker accountable for his sub-contractors. And — a protection worth flagging — it forbids the maker from contracting OUT of that responsibility: 'It is not acceptable to stipulate in manufacturing contracts a condition that relieves the manufacturer from liability.' A build financed this way cannot bury an exculpation clause that leaves the customer holding a defective asset.
HOW TO CITE IT HONESTLY. Res 129 is a settled ruling — sixteen numbered heads plus a single Recommendation, not a deferral — and it fixes no figure, rate or named provider of its own. It CITES two resolutions the corpus already carries (Res 65 on istiṣnāʿ, Res 109 on the penalty clause) by their numbers rather than reproducing them, so nothing here duplicates existing entries; it complements them. Its one Recommendation is itself a thread worth pulling: the Academy asks 'To conduct special studies on some other forms of manufacturing contracts such as BOT contracts (Build, Operate, and Transfer).' — the very research request that six years later produced Resolution No. 182 (8/19) on Build-Operate-Transfer financing. The head about deferring payment does contain the word 'postpone', and it is worth being precise about it: the resolution PERMITS postponing payment of the price, which is a lawful commercial feature of the sale, not a deferral of the ruling itself (the ruling is fully settled across its sixteen heads). What Res 129 gives the reader is the contract structure beneath halal construction and manufacturing finance: a price for a made thing, fixed one of three sound ways, disciplined by a penalty clause, and payable up front or over milestones — with no interest anywhere in it. It closes on 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing.'
Wording inside quotation marks is quoted from the source. The rest is this notebook’s summary of it — read the original before relying on it.
Provenance
- Compiled from
- Compiled 2026-07-22 from the International Islamic Fiqh Academy's OWN OFFICIAL ENGLISH text of the resolution. PRIMARY AND SOLE AUTHORITY FOR EVERY VERBATIM SPAN ATTRIBUTED TO RES 129: the IIFA Official Edition (Resolutions and Recommendations of the International Islamic Fiqh Academy, Oct 2021), Resolution No. 129 (3/14), 14th session, Doha, State of Qatar, 11-16 January 2003. Every quoted span machine-verified verbatim against that source under a canonical normalisation (build_res129.py; audit_res129.py re-extracts every quote from the finished prose and re-verifies). No figure, rate, scholar, board, provider grade, madhab tally, vote count, statute or regulator is asserted; no Qur'an verse, hadith wording, grading or citation number is reproduced. Res 65 (istiṣnāʿ) and Res 109 (penalty clause) are cited only by the resolution numbers Res 129 itself names, not by reproducing their text.
- Source
- PRIMARY TEXT (full title; 14th-session city, country and dates; the 'Resolves' with its sixteen numbered heads — the istiṣnāʿ/ijāra definition, the pointer to Res 65, the three price-determination methods a/b/c, the penalty clause pointing to Res 109, the deferred/installment payment head, the amendment/sub-contracting/liability heads — followed by a Recommendation and closing on 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing.'). International Islamic Fiqh Academy, Official Edition (Oct 2021), Resolution No. 129 (3/14). Every verbatim span machine-verified against this source (build_res129.py, keyed by block, plus two settledness negative controls Res 77 (8/8) and Res 122 (4/13); audit_res129.py re-extracts every quote from the finished prose and re-verifies against the source). Diffed against the corpus on disk to confirm UNCOVERED before writing: the corpus held Res 65 (istiṣnāʿ) and Res 109 (penalty clause) but NO resolution assembling them into the manufacturing/construction-contract framework of Res 129.
- School / basis
- Comparative fiqh of the manufacturing/construction contract (istiṣnāʿ and the ijāra of pure workmanship), with a PRIMARY OIC collective text. Resolution No. 129 (3/14), 14th session (Doha, State of Qatar, 11-16 January 2003). Rules across sixteen numbered heads: (1) a manufacturing contract is permissible whether the maker supplies work + materials (istiṣnāʿ) or work only (ijāra); (2) the materials-plus-work case is governed by Res 65 (3/7) on istiṣnāʿ; (3) the work-only case requires a pre-determined reward; (4) the price may be fixed by lump-sum against precise specs, by unit-rate against agreed drawings, or by cost-plus with the contractor's books opened; (5) a penalty clause is permitted (except force majeure), applying Res 109 (3/12); (6) the price may be DEFERRED or paid in INSTALLMENTS at pre-determined maturities or milestone phases — the head that makes istiṣnāʿ a financing instrument; (7-9) amendments by agreement, with/without the owner's permission handled differently; (10-16) the maker's liability for infringement/negligence/defects, sub-contracting rules, and a ban on any clause relieving the maker of liability. CONFINED (settled-with-recommendation): a single Recommendation follows the sixteen heads — 'To conduct special studies on some other forms of manufacturing contracts such as BOT contracts (Build, Operate, and Transfer).' (the seed of Res 182 (8/19)) — closing on 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing.'; recommendation-bearing like Res 140/212/224/238/178/200/145, not fully settled like Res 130/132/141/143/157. Settledness verified: 0 deferral keywords (the lone 'postpone' is a permitted deferral of PAYMENT, head 6, not of the ruling — proven by a commercial-deferral assertion in the gate), 0 deferral paraphrases, 12 counted operative units (9 single-digit numbered heads + 3 lettered price methods; heads 10-16 are double-digit and undercounted by the single-digit regex, so the true head count is sixteen). Its value to a riba-free corpus is the contract beneath halal CONSTRUCTION finance (distinct from the halal PURCHASE finance already covered): a sale of a made thing whose price may be deferred over milestones with no interest.
- Captured
- 2026-07-22
- Added
- 2026-07-22
- Trust
- Primary or near-primary source with a stable public URL.
Compiler’s note
Added 2026-07-22 (auto-run, P2 corpus). Chosen the instructed way: LISTED content/articles/ and diffed against the source table of contents for a genuinely UNCOVERED, SETTLED, SUBSTANTIVE resolution. Res 129 (3/14) is the OIC's full framework for the manufacturing/construction contract — the istiṣnāʿ family — a core riba-FREE financing mode: a buyer commissions the making or building of an asset for a price that may be paid up front, deferred, or by installments, with no interest-bearing loan in the structure. It is the contract beneath halal CONSTRUCTION finance, distinct from the halal PURCHASE finance already in the corpus. Re-checked ON DISK: UNCOVERED (no content/articles/*resolution-129* file; the corpus held Res 65 (istiṣnāʿ) and Res 109 (penalty clause) but NOT the framework tying them into a working construction contract). SETTLED ('Resolves' across sixteen numbered heads plus lettered price-determination sub-items — not a deferral). CONFINED (a single Recommendation follows the sixteen heads — the request for 'special studies on some other forms of manufacturing contracts such as BOT contracts (Build, Operate, and Transfer)', the seed of Res 182 (8/19) — so the build gate ASSERTS the Recommendation is PRESENT; recommendation-bearing like Res 140/212/224/238/178/200/145, unlike fully-settled Res 130/132/141/143/157). SUBSTANTIVE (the istiṣnāʿ-vs-ijāra definition, the three lawful price methods, the penalty clause, DEFERRED/installment payment, amendments, sub-contracting, and the liability rules including the ban on any exculpation clause). DISTINCT NOT DUPLICATE: Res 129 CITES Res 65 and Res 109 by number as its OWN words ('becomes subject to the Academy resolution no. 65 (3/7) on Istiṣnā'; 'Academy resolution no. 109 (3/12) on Penalty Clause should be applied'), reproducing neither. THE 'postpone' SUBTLETY (the build_res186 partial-postponement lesson applied to a keyword): head 6 permits deferring PAYMENT of the price — a permitted commercial feature, not a deferral of the ruling. The Res 145 keyword gate's bare postpone-token match would false-positive on it; this gate extends the SAME commercial-deferral exception the defer branch already carried (excluding payment/price/sale/delivery/exchange) to the postpone branch, and then ASSERTS that EVERY defer/postpone token in the resolution (there is exactly one, in head 6) is a commercial payment/price deferral — so the exception cannot mask a subject deferral. TWO NEGATIVE CONTROLS, both still caught: (1) Res 77 (8/8) caught by the PARAPHRASE gate ('commission further research') with NO keyword; (2) Res 122 (4/13) caught by the KEYWORD gate — its 'Postponement of deliberations' is NOT a payment/price deferral, so the exception correctly does not fire — plus the paraphrase gate. HARD-HYPHEN: six line-break hyphens in the primary block, NONE corroborated as a genuine compound elsewhere, so all soft and HARD_HYPHEN is empty; the mid-line compounds 'pre-determined', 'agreed-upon', 'cost-plus' are genuine hyphenated words quoted as-is. DROPPED per no-fab: no provider, scheme, scholar, board, figure, rate, threshold, fee, statute or regulator ('a definite percentage as profit' names no number); NO scriptural text (the closing 'Indeed, Allāh is All-Knowing.' is devotional). The istiṣnāʿ-as-halal-construction-finance framing and the cross-references to Res 65/109/182 are the article's own framing, labelled as such, not put in Res 129's mouth. GLOBAL-FIRST: universal fiqh of the manufacturing/construction contract, no AU baseline. VERIFICATION: build_res129.py = 22/22 hand-listed spans across three blocks (keyed by block; union never used) + both negative-control proofs + the three settledness gates + the commercial-deferral assertion + the Recommendation-PRESENT assertion. audit_res129.py = every quote re-extracted from the FINISHED JSON on disk and re-verified against the source (multi-block haystack: Res 129/77/122), allow-list empty; no-figure + no-scripture assertions hold. Articles 137, corpus total 235. RENDER PROOF: built /corpus HTML shows 137 Articles and 235 Total. Clean rm -rf .next && npm run build = 208/208 static pages; npm run lint = exit 0 (0/0). PUNCH-LIST FULLY TICKED (P0/P1/P3 + wave2 5-8 verified closed on disk; P2 corpus is the standing deepening track). NEXT candidate: keep diffing content/articles/ against the source TOC. Res 182 (8/19) BOT is uncovered/settled and thematically adjacent (the child of this resolution's Recommendation) but MECHANICALLY THIN — only 3 numbered heads + 1 recommendation = 3 operative units, below the >=5 gate; do not weaken the gate to admit it. Res 133 (7/14) Problem of Arrears heavily REPRODUCES already-covered Res 10/51/85/109 quotes (poor no-fab candidate). Res 147 (5/16) International Commodities largely reconfirms the covered Res 63. AVOID the whole-subject deferrals already logged (Res 33 (8/4), which postpones its whole subject for further research, Res 77 (8/8), Res 87 (4/9), Res 122 (4/13), Res 124 (6/13), Res 187 (2/20), Res 188 (3/20)) and Res 237 (8/24); ALWAYS verify a real 'Resolves', RUN ALL THREE SETTLEDNESS GATES, and check operative-unit count >=5 before writing.
Topics
istisnaistisnaamanufacturing-contractconstruction-contractconstruction-financebuild-ordermade-to-order-saleijara-of-workpenalty-clauseforce-majeuredeferred-priceinstallment-pricemilestone-paymentsprice-certaintygharar-avoidancecost-plusunit-ratelump-sumsub-contractingcontractor-liabilityno-exculpation-clausebot-precursorresolution-182-botresolution-65-istisnaresolution-109-penaltyiifaoic-fiqh-academyresolution-129riba-free-financehalal-home-construction14th-session-doha
This is source material, not a ruling. The corpus records what a named source actually said, so that you can read it yourself and take it to a scholar you trust. Ask the corpus to search all entries at once, or return to the library.