—whichever of the two predominates, he should remove half of his wealth; the remaining half is lawful for him. This was the practice of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb with his provincial governors: he divided their assets and took one half. If the precise amount of the illicit portion is known, it must be given away in charity on behalf of its rightful owners.

Fourth: Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn said: When a usurper trades with the misappropriated property, causes it to grow, and earns a profit, the fairest opinion is that the profit be split equally between him and the owner. This was ʿUmar’s ruling, endorsed by the Companions and adopted by the jurists, for justice demands it: the capital belonged to one party and the labor to the other, so neither may claim the entire profit.

Fifth: Shaykh ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad said: Any community that has long followed a custom at odds with the rulings of the sacred law—whether in matters of inheritance, bloodshed, blood-money, or otherwise—while deeming it permissible in their pre-Islamic days, is not to be held liable, once they learn and reform, for what they did in that period with respect to property they wrongfully acquired and the like.

As for debts and items held in trust, Islam does not annul them; they must be restored to their rightful owners. Allah knows best.