Islamic Law Officially Adopted In Britain

Some_God

Newbie
Joined
Aug 29, 2003
Messages
1,862
Reaction score
0
Revealed: UK?s first official sharia courts

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749183.ece

Abul Taher

ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court.

Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.

It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network?s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

Siddiqi said: ?We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are.?

The disclosure that Muslim courts have legal powers in Britain comes seven months after Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was pilloried for suggesting that the establishment of sharia in the future ?seems unavoidable? in Britain.

In July, the head of the judiciary, the lord chief justice, Lord Phillips, further stoked controversy when he said that sharia could be used to settle marital and financial disputes.

In fact, Muslim tribunal courts started passing sharia judgments in August 2007. They have dealt with more than 100 cases that range from Muslim divorce and inheritance to nuisance neighbours.

It has also emerged that tribunal courts have settled six cases of domestic violence between married couples, working in tandem with the police investigations.

Siddiqi said he expected the courts to handle a greater number of ?smaller? criminal cases in coming years as more Muslim clients approach them. ?All we are doing is regulating community affairs in these cases,? said Siddiqi, chairman of the governing council of the tribunal.

Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act.

Politicians and church leaders expressed concerns that this could mark the beginnings of a ?parallel legal system? based on sharia for some British Muslims.

Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: ?If it is true that these tribunals are passing binding decisions in the areas of family and criminal law, I would like to know which courts are enforcing them because I would consider such action unlawful. British law is absolute and must remain so.?

Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, said: ?I think it?s appalling. I don?t think arbitration that is done by sharia should ever be endorsed or enforced by the British state.?

There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men.

Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.

The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.

In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.

In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations.

Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance.

Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: ?The MCB supports these tribunals. If the Jewish courts are allowed to flourish, so must the sharia ones.?

Additional reporting: Helen Brooks
 
Wow... horrible. Horrible to the max.
 
Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.
I dont see what the big deal is. It be like me and another person deciding that Judge Judy would preside over our dispute. So what?
 
It should be made clear that, whatever the implications of this, there seems to have been no concrete change in the law. I'm not sure this is anything new - it seems to be just religiously-motivated ADR.
 
Finally. Those Islamic women werent getting bad enough deals. Now they are finally down at the last peg with the puke and shit.



Sucks.
 
Say what you will about America, we're still a long way from shit like this happening here (and ID cards/constant surveillance/state censorship/etc.).

Any form of religion in government, especially in the judicial system, is completely unacceptable. Regardless of the element of "consent" or how valid this development really is, it's still completely ridiculous that such a notion is being considered in a western country.
 
It doesn't matter how much you don't like it, it can happen. Especially with vice presidential candidates implying that our involvement in the ME is a holy war.
 
That's horrible. They are given a choice over which court they want to go right? I mean, if you take a look at that Muslim family, say the case where the daughters received less land than the sons, the daughters would probably be unwilling because they would know the the verdict would be against them and would rather go to a normal court. If that's the case, then are they allowed to???

Because if they aren't, then that's a loss of freedom for them, which is against most laws, like the British one. And what if they did go against it, and maybe brought the case up to British courts that they were treated unfairly by the Shariah courts. Then which court's rulings would precede over which?

Seems very messy here this whole thing.
 
I dont see what the big deal is. It be like me and another person deciding that Judge Judy would preside over our dispute. So what?

Agreed. It's effectively given Muslims the option to resolve some of their affairs using sharia if they choose to.
 
Agreed. It's effectively given Muslims the option to resolve some of their affairs using sharia if they choose to.
What if the man is very dominant of the woman and indirectly forces her to use sharia courts instead of regular ones so that he will get a better deal?
 
If the women is co-erced into going to court, surely they would just be co-erced into doing whatever the man wants anyway.
 
What if the man is very dominant of the woman and indirectly forces her to use sharia courts instead of regular ones so that he will get a better deal?

If the women is co-erced into going to court, surely they would just be co-erced into doing whatever the man wants anyway.

Your powers grow stronger young Padawan.
 
What if the man is very dominant of the woman and indirectly forces her to use sharia courts instead of regular ones so that he will get a better deal?
This is the biggest problem with this news, not the fact that ORMG BRITEN IS OVERRUN.

Muslims should be able to work out their alternative dispute resolution in whatever way they want, but the fact is that some muslims will be tacitly forced, by community pressure, etc. to agree to a means of arbitration that is biased against them - 'some muslims' in this case being 'female muslims.'

What is required is a more thorough inspection of the conditions of assent, when the parties involved are agreeing to their little Sharia arbitration. If it is likely that one party is under unfair pressure or duress - even if that pressure is as indirect as the desire to preserve a reputation in a community - then the arbitration terms should be rendered non-binding.

However that may not even be sufficient, since I suspect that what lends these sharia rulings their force in the muslim community is not the fact that they become legally binding, but rather the unspoken idea of 'you will comply to these terms or god and every muslim will hate you.'

Tbh I don't give a crap if muslim women are stupid enough to subject themselves to chauvinism - it's their lives to waste. But the state should do everything possible to make sure that it's not being a party to it.
 
alarmist media ftl, you already have religious arbitration, so does canada, so does the US. orthodox jews have courts that decide civil matters (which is what sharia law is: civil matters, not criminal) divorce, even civil litigation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm
 
Indeed, very alarmist thread title.

It's no different that when me and my brother used to have a dispute over who's turn it was on the PC, to go to our sister and get her to decide who was right. Doesn't mean my sister is Officially the queen of england lol.
 
Say what you will about America, we're still a long way from shit like this happening here (and ID cards/constant surveillance/state censorship/etc.).

It's like that in the High Schools.
 
Some_God, thanks for proving the point I've been making for a very long time, that the media especially in the UK is absolutely insane when it comes to the muslim issue. This is typical alarmist bullshit that helps shape the unfair hate directed at Islam, and this thread is proof. Just look at how many people jumped on board without actually reading the article.
 
I support No Limit with that to an extent, however none of the papers had the balls to publish the cartoons.
 
Say what you will about America, we're still a long way from shit like this happening here (and ID cards/constant surveillance/state censorship/etc.).

Ah look! Ignorance! First of all, America does plan to introduce ID cards. Security Cameras? You mean the ones that America doesn't have right?.

The third one is just stupid and plain wrong.

On the other hand, its because of things like this (on top of our pathetic, worthless, corrupt and spineless politicians, the PC brigade and the ludicrous taxes) that I am leaving this country the first opportunity I can.
 
Ah look! Ignorance! First of all, America does plan to introduce ID cards and the second two are complete bullshit and you should stop before you make your self look stupid. "Constant surveillance" over exaggeration, and if you honestly believe that big American cities do not have shitloads of security cameras you are one dumbass muthaf*cker.

On the other hand, its because of things like this (on top of our pathetic, worthless, corrupt and spineless politicians, the PC brigade and the ludicrous taxes) that I am leaving this country the first opportunity I can.

angry piggy is angry
 
I support No Limit with that to an extent, however none of the papers had the balls to publish the cartoons.

I think they should have. I was also pissed at Comedy Central when they refused to air the picture of Mohammed when South Park tried to do it.
 
Alarmist indeed, but they, I think all religion is a disease on human development, Islam being one of the biggest offenders of common decency, so let the media kick Islam. :LOL:
 
about the not posting the anti-islamic cartoon:


the media is supposed to report the news ..not create it
 
I think the media just takes the overall opinions shared by the majority of the world and takes it up a notch. If it supports their reasoning for the war, then fine. Mission accomplished for them, but just because they may over-exaggerate does not mean Islam should be free from being criticized. Any religion that treats women in such a manner is just plain stupid and when incorporated into law, it's downright lunacy.

Sharia law can suck my dick

I think they should have. I was also pissed at Comedy Central when they refused to air the picture of Mohammed when South Park tried to do it.

That was a great episode though, you have to respect the writers portrayal of American ignorance.
 
typical alarmist bullshit that helps shape the unfair hate directed at Islam, and this thread is proof.

I was also pissed at Comedy Central when they refused to air the picture of Mohammed when South Park tried to do it.

Let me get this straight. You're upset at the unfair hate Islam receives, but you are also upset that a portrait of Islam's holy prophet isn't published?
 
so you'll be using those same words when talking about orthodox jews because they pretty much do the same?

that's the point of the accusation of media bias, no one ever mentions the other backward ass religious groups that premeate society
 
Let me get this straight. You're upset at the unfair hate Islam receives, but you are also upset that a portrait of Islam's holy prophet isn't published?

Sure. What's your point? Just because the media is chicken shit doesn't excuse the fact that they put out alarmis propaganda that people like you then spread.
 
Sure. What's your point? Just because the media is chicken shit doesn't excuse the fact that they put out alarmis propaganda that people like you then spread.

Someone's on the rag today. If they show the world a picture of Mohammed, surely the Muslims will riot, as they did when the cartoons were published. Do you bother to think two steps ahead?

Don't blame me for spreading "alarmis propaganda", I read it and posted it here because I thought it was interesting. I know we have lots of people from the UK here and wanted to see what their input was on this situation. I have heard that the racial and religious tension in Britain is at a boiling point.
 
How many muslims rioted? This is again what people like you do. You take a small group of assholes and then apply what they did across the board. People riot over soccer games in europe, I guess that must tell you something about ALL europeans? Right?

How was what you posted "interesting"? It is a pack of alarmist propaganda. I guess if I start posting 9/11 conspiracy theories or how the earth was created 4,000 years ago I don't actually subscribe to it, I just find it interesting?

Also, thank you for pointing out I didn't add the "t" to alarmist, I'm such an ass for that.
 
Has anyone actually read sharia law? I haven't, but I wonder if it really is that bad.
 
Back
Top