The British government is to issue its first ever Islamic (Sharia)-compliant government bonds. Although borrowing money from before-untapped Muslim investors may seem ideal for the indebted UK Treasury, the implications of being beholden to Sharia law are massive.

The United Kingdom government estimates Islamic financial assets worldwide now exceed $250 billion and are quickly mounting. Obviously this large and growing pool of investment capital is a tempting target for a country that will need to borrow almost $120 billion this year to cover its spending deficit and bonds which are coming due.

“I believe there are great potential advantages for the UK government issuing Sharia-compliant government debt,” said UK Treasury Minister Ed Balls. “The feasibility study will also be assessing the opportunity for issuing such instruments, taking into account the government’s debt management objectives” (Daily News, April 24).

Yet, borrowing from those practicing the Sharia law comes with strings attached that many Westerners may not be familiar with.

Under Sharia law, normal financial transactions such as receiving interest payments or investing in items like pork, gambling and pornography are strictly prohibited. But the limitations go far beyond that. The UK government appears to be ignoring the fact that Sharia law “stipulates that money must not be used for a purpose incompatible with Islam” (Financial Times, April 26; emphasis ours).

This could have a wide range of effects on government spending. Borrowed Sharia money could not be spent on a range of items including certain foods, Western clothing, animal welfare that promotes the welfare of non-halal animals, and certain types of media broadcasting (because it produces gossip).

It also means that this money “could not be used in the furtherance of many individual freedoms, or in the promotion of any idealistic or political worldview other than Islam,” including secular democracy, says Andrea Williams, from the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship (ibid.).

Allowing future UK government finance to be determined by law not recognized in the UK and based upon a foreign and often hostile religion is absurd.

The Sharia investors will decide what the money can and can’t be spent on. And who, as Williams asks, will arbitrate disputes between the government and its Islamic creditors? “Is the government prepared to be bound to the decisions of Islamic scholars on the practicalities of these bonds?”

Before committing itself to be bound to the rules of Islamic Sharia, Britain’s Parliament ought to review Proverbs 22:7: “[T]he borrower is servant to the lender.”