Scrap RM15k haj savings rule, don't burden aspiring pilgrims - Tuan Ibrahim
PARLIAMENT | The government has been urged to scrap a requirement for Tabung Haji depositors to maintain a minimum savings balance of RM15,000 before accepting an offer to perform the haj.
Kubang Kerian MP Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man said the requirement would create another hurdle for Muslims aspiring to undertake the pilgrimage, particularly those from rural communities.
He noted that many ordinary Muslims would...
PARLIAMENT | The government has been urged to scrap a requirement for Tabung Haji depositors to maintain a minimum savings balance of RM15,000 before accepting an offer to perform the haj.
Kubang Kerian MP Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man said the requirement would create another hurdle for Muslims aspiring to undertake the pilgrimage, particularly those from rural communities.
He noted that many ordinary Muslims would struggle to accumulate the required amount, adding that couples would need to set aside RM30,000 between them.
"Since Malaysians typically perform the haj as couples, this means a total of RM30,000 must be locked away in accounts for each pair," he said.
"For rural and village communities, an amount of RM30,000 is considered very substantial.
"Tabung Haji should function to make it easier for Muslims to perform the haj, rather than acting like a strict business entity that burdens pilgrims with heavy financial conditions," he said while debating Budget 2027 in Parliament today.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/02/ff664d4f851d9c80e7adfb11a2433d58.jpg)
Yesterday, Bernama reported that Tabung Haji introduced the RM15,000 minimum savings requirement to reduce the number of prospective pilgrims who decline haj offers.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Religious Affairs) Marhamah Rosli described the policy as a positive step towards ensuring prospective pilgrims are financially prepared for the pilgrimage.
"When there is such a ruling, the number of rejections after receiving a haj call-up drops significantly. It also prevents Tabung Haji from having to repeat the process - meaning making an offer, having it rejected, and offering again.
"So, we look at it from a positive perspective and as a reminder for everyone, including myself, that we should all strive toward istito'ah (capacity), as the haj demands commitment," she said.
Tuan Ibrahim also questioned whether the requirement was intended to ensure Tabung Haji had sufficient funds for investment, arguing that any returns generated from depositors’ savings should benefit the savers themselves.
"Those savings are frequently used for investments, where the profits should rightfully be returned to the savers instead of restricting their access," he added.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2026/08/023f3e1268b44a17bbc608632cd64b5f.jpg)
He urged the government to abolish the requirement and explore alternative measures to ensure pilgrims are financially prepared without placing undue burdens on them.
Flood mitigation in Kelantan
On flood mitigation efforts in Kelantan, Tuan Ibrahim urged the government to implement phases two and three of the flood barrier project concurrently.
He said this was crucial to prevent worsening floods in Rantau Panjang, Tumpat, and Pasir Mas, particularly following Thailand’s completion of its barrier along the Golok River.
Malaysia has only recently begun phase one of the project, which is scheduled for completion around July 2027.
"There is concern that if phase one fails to finish on schedule, while phase two is delayed, Rantau Panjang, Tumpat, and Pasir Mas will face even worse floods.
"Therefore, it is suggested that phases two and three be built simultaneously so that the project under construction can genuinely function as planned," he added.
Tuan Ibrahim, RM15,000 is a substantial sum for ordinary families. But scrapping the requirement does not make the cost of performing the haj disappear. Financial readiness matters, and repeated declined offers also mean more work to fill the available places. If you believe this threshold is unsuitable, propose a workable alternative that protects poorer pilgrims while ensuring those accepting an offer can afford to go. You also ask whether this is about securing investment funds. Where is the evidence for that suggestion? Question the policy by all means, but implying another motive does not establish one. Explain what safeguards or targeted assistance you would introduce. Calling a requirement burdensome is easy. Showing how to help people meet the actual cost is the responsibility that comes with your criticism.
Report this comment
/file/attachments/orphans/fasdasdasd_730400.png)

Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.