Some people bring workers from abroad on the basis that they will work for them, but when they arrive, they do not work for them; rather, they leave them to do any work outside of their authority.

The questioner : Another question: Some people bring workers from abroad on the basis that they will work for them, but when they arrive, they do not work for them. For example, they leave them to do any work outside of their authority, and then they come with a specific agreed-upon amount every month. This is one scenario. A second scenario is when a person from a certain country agrees with a resident of another country to open a shop, but it is registered in the name of the resident, and the resident receives a specific amount of money for this. What is the ruling in these two scenarios?

The Shaykh : We do not consider this permissible either, unless there are responsibilities and guarantees. If that tenant, or the one who took the shop in the name of the owner from the other country, fails to fulfill his obligations, and if there are guarantees and sureties that may result in harm, then it is permissible. Otherwise, if the matter is merely formal, then as we said earlier, these are false reasons that do not justify the money they take.

The questioner : What are these guarantees like?

The Shaykh : I am speaking in general terms. For example, a surety is when one person guarantees for another. The guaranteed person might flee, for instance, in which case the guarantor becomes liable for financial responsibility, imprisonment, or something similar. This is what I am referring to. If that is the case, otherwise the ruling is completely clear. Is any of this what I mentioned earlier?

The questioner : Yes, it is widespread.

The Shaykh : No, I mean the surety. Yes.