In times of crisis, as we have seen during the current crisis, other more unconventional methods can be used, such as fixed-rate lending at longer maturities and asset purchases (quantity easing) to affect longer interest rates and expectations of future short rates, and foreign-exchange intervention to prevent currency appreciation or even to induce currency depreciation. The authority responsible for monetary policy is typically the central bank. Financial-stability policy has the objective of maintaining and promoting financial stability. Financial stability can be defined as a situation where the financial system can fulfil its main functions of submitting payments, channelling saving into investment, and providing risk sharing without disturbances that have significant costs. The available instruments are, under normal circumstances, supervision, regulation, and financial-stability reports with analyses and leading indicators that may provide early warnings of stability threats. In times of crisis, authorities may use such instruments as lending of last resort, variable-rate lending at longer maturities (credit policy, credit easing), special resolution regimes for financial firms in trouble, government lending guarantees, government capital injections, and so forth. The responsible authority or authorities vary across countries. In some countries it is the central bank, in other countries there is a separate financial supervisory authority, and sometimes the authority is shared between different institutions. Financial-stability policy and monetary policy are conceptually distinct, with distinct objectives and distinct suitable instruments. My point here is that this has to be taken into account when considering the lessons of the financial crisis for monetary policy.

Institutional structure that is determined by the legal and administrative framework is the first pillar of competitiveness. The ability to execute financial transactions efficiently, with  2  BIS Review 117/2009  sufficient certainty and enforceability, and a clear process for resolving ambiguities and possible breaches of the contract will enhance competitiveness, both at the institutional level as well as for the financial system as a whole. In Malaysia, Islamic finance disputes are adjudicated in civil courts and not the Shariah courts where the jurisdiction is limited to matters relating to Muslim individuals. If the dispute concerns a point on the ascertainment of Shariah, the courts and arbitrators are required to refer to the Shariah Council at Bank Negara Malaysia to facilitate the ruling. The Shariah Council’s authority is the ultimate body responsible for Shariah in banking and financial matters that is within the purview of Bank Negara Malaysia. This referral system provides an enabling platform for preserving consistency and predictability in interpretation and application of Shariah principles for financial transaction in Malaysia. Concluding remarks Allow me to now conclude my remarks. The inherent strengths of Islamic finance amid the global financial crisis has heightened interest in Islamic finance across the world. The level of innovation, scale and complexity of Islamic financial transactions is also increasing at a tremendous pace. Going forward, it is envisaged that the legal services in Islamic finance will become even more significant in the continued advancement and efficiency of Islamic finance.