Población: MYPE Acreditadas en el año 2017

in different ways according to their experiences in view of the interview context (Harris and Brown, 2010). Furthermore, the selection of this method was justified because most of the vital data was collected directly from people who were directly involved in Shariah and advised for Islamic banks and whom may have similar or different experiences for different institutions.

3.5.1 THE DEVELOPMENT OF SEMI STRUCTURED QUESTIONNAIRES AND INTERVIEWS

The development of the questionnaires requires in-depth understanding and extensive analysis of existing regulatory requirements and guidelines issued by the central bank of Malaysia, BNM or other relevant authorities in order to maintain the originality and practicality of the questions. Questionnaires may be conducted in two ways, namely structured questionnaires and semi-structured questionnaires. According to (Phellas, Bloch and Seale, 2011), questions which have been prepared in advance make structured questionnaires and participants respond with prompt answers by

selecting the best answer that has been already been provided. On the other hand, semi-structured questionnaires include a combination of closed and open questions. In this case, there are questions provided in advance, however, a respondent may give their own opinion in a given space. They are commonly used in research where there is a demand to achieve diversity of responses from different group of respondents. For the purpose of this study, a semi-structured questionnaire approach has been chosen to develop an in-depth understanding from the study. Questions were divided into sections relevant to the research questions. Some questions were provided with answers and some questions were provided with a comments box. For the purpose of this study, questionnaires were given out using Survey Monkey to various Islamic banks in Malaysia. A total of 50 links were given through emails to selected Shariah officers in Shariah department of the banks.

In addition to that, semi-structured interviews that were also called in-depth interviews or conversations with purpose, were performed in this study. The interviews were a mix between two types of structured and unstructured interviews. In a semi-structured interview, an interviewer allows an interviewee to respond in different paths. This type of interview is said to be the best method of gathering intensive qualitative information. (Rubin and Rubin, 2011) suggests that in-depth interviews are especially useful in answering questions.

Characteristics of semi-structured interviews are as follows: - (a) A respondent and interviewer engage in a formal interview.

(b) Normally, the interviewer prepares a set of questions and topics that need to be covered during the interview and along the way, adds questions to suit the situation. (c) In the event an interviewee strays from the original topic, the interviewer assists the interviewee to take the latter back to the topic. However, the interviewer may still take notes on matters which are relevant to the questions asked.

*Recording an interview. According to (Rubin and Rubin, 2011), the most common method in recording interview data is using audio recorders or video cameras or even by taking notes. The use of digital recorders is effective and easy, as it contributes to a more relaxed atmosphere. Furthermore, an interviewer is freed from the distraction of note taking.

*Ethical duties. (Polit and Hungler, 1992) defined confidentiality as protecting a respondent and their identities should not be disclosed to the public. All participants are entitled to privacy and confidentiality. All information given by a respondent should not be disclosed unless specific consent has been given by a respondent. Based on the research formulated in this study, the researcher generated fifty-eight questions which were categorised into four sections of the focused research objectives. Most of the questions were designed to be closed ended to so the interviewees could answer specifically within four structured answers, which were: Strongly Agree, Agree, Disagree and Strongly disagree. These four options for the answers did not give room for the interviewees to be neutral and helped the questions to be answered accurately. Only a few of the questions were given in an opened- ended structure, as this type of question was useful in obtaining unbiased feedback, because the interviewees could provide and respond with their own opinions without restriction. This also allowed the researcher to explore new areas that went beyond her limited knowledge.

The following table describes the linkage between the Questionnaires, Sections and Research Objectives.

Research Objectives Sections Questionnaires To explore the Shariah

governance framework of IFIs. In attaining the objective, the following sub- objectives were developed: a. To understand the importance of Shariah standards and principles in Islamic finance.

b. To determine the roles and responsibilities of Shariah advisers in IFIs.

Understanding of Islamic Finance.

Questions related to training, education and working experience of the respondents in relation to Islamic banking exposure which were;

Question no.7, Question no 8 and Question no 10.

Shariah Governance Framework of Islamic banks.

Questions related to the roles of Shariah Committee, Shariah compliance and monitoring the process of the

c. To explore the Shariah governance issued by relevant international Islamic standard setting bodies such as AAOIFI and IFSB.

d. To assess the

relevant Shariah governance issued by other financial regulators.

Islamic banks which were; Question no.18, Question no 19 and Question no 37.

To examine regulatory framework in governing non-Shariah compliant income in the Islamic banking industry. The following sub-objectives were developed:

a. To understand the issues of non-Shariah compliant events in IFIs. b. To discuss the nature of non-Shariah compliant events.

c. To identify the

existence of Shariah compliant events and income in IFIs.

d. To explore the

relevant laws and legal regulatory framework governing non-Shariah Legal regulatory framework governing non-Shariah compliant income.

Questions related to the existence of non-Shariah compliant events, compliance with AML acts and other applicable legal regulatory requirements governing the Islamic banks in channelling illegitimate funds which were;

Question no.10, Question no.12, Question no.15, Question no.17, from question no.24 until no.29, from question no.53 until no.63, Question no.39 and Question no.40.

compliant income for IFIs in Malaysia.

e. To explore the

relevant guidelines in relation to non-Shariah compliant income issued by financial regulators other than Malaysia.

f. To assess the Anti Money laundering and

Counter Financing Terrorism policy and its

relevancy with channelling funds to charitable bodies. To observe and identify the financial disclosure and treatment of non-Shariah compliant income by IFIs. The sub-objectives are as follows:

a. To review the annual report of IFIs regarding disclosure of non-Shariah income.

b. To assess the Shariah

Committee Report pertaining to non-Shariah

compliant events that occurred in IFIs.

c. To identify the

amount of non-Shariah

Purification of non- Shariah compliant income and its disclosure in the annual report of an Islamic bank.

Questions related to the treatment, disclosure and reporting of non-Shariah compliant events which were;

Question no.38, question no.13, and no.14, question no.16, from question no.20 until no.23, from question no.30 until question no.36 and from question no.41 until no.52.

compliant income disclosed by IFIs in Malaysia.

d. To determine the recipients of non-Shariah income purified by IFIs.

e. To assess the

screening procedures within IFIs to identify if a charitable body that has a relationship with terrorism activities.

f. To test the

relationship between IFI revenues and non-Shariah compliant income through relevant ratios.

Table 5 Linkage between the Questionnaires, Sections and Research Objectives