Sharia, or Muslim religious law, has been highly controversial in the UK. Interpretations of Sharia are associated in other countries with harsh penalties unknown in the UK; campaigners and politicians worry that Muslim women are discriminated against when family disputes are resolved under Sharia. UKIP says that: The law of the land must apply to us all. We oppose any other system of law; its leader has referred to 80 practising Sharia courts around the United Kingdom. Teresa May has also called for a review of Sharia courts in a recent speech. Are there Sharia courts in Britain? While there are undoubtedly lots of different councils and tribunals dealing with Sharia principles, they arent courts of law. Most are Sharia councils set up to make decisions on purely religious matters, although there are some bodies that mix Sharia principles with legally binding arbitration. But none can overrule the regular courts. Sharia councils Getting married for the purposes of your religion doesnt necessarily mean you are married in the eyes of the state. Equally, the paperwork required for a civil divorce neednt be recognised by your religion. For this reason, many Sharia councils exist to issue Islamic divorce certificates, and give advice on other aspects of religious law. Theyre often attached to mosques. One piece of research from the University of Reading has identified 30 major councils, and some smaller ones, providing these services. Family law and Sharia Other services related to family issues might be offered by a Sharia council. Family mediation is one example. Some campaigners worry about using mediation by religious bodies to work out agreements about children and finances after a marriage breaks down. In 2014 Baroness Cox, a member of the House of Lords, tried to introduce a law to ensure that women arent disadvantaged in mediation by religious bodies, and make clear that they arent a court. But, formally, this is already the case. While feuding couples have to at least consider mediation before going to court, it doesnt override family law. A court has to sign off on any agreement made after divorce for it to be legally binding, and wont do so if the judge thinks its unfair. In 2013, the High Court was asked by an Orthodox Jewish couple to accept the ruling of a Jewish religious court on post-divorce family arrangements. The judge said that while the agreement would carry weight, it would be non-bindingneither party could get around English law by agreeing to abide by the decision of another tribunal. Rather than open the door to Sharia divorces, as some newspapers reported, the judgment confirmed that agreements made in a religious form are ultimately subject to English law. - - - Updated - - - Do you feel the same way about Jewish religious law? Somehow I doubt it.
Do they treat woman or minorities difrently? If so, I oppose it too. From what I heard about Israeli laws, palistine people who have inhabited the land and who lived there long before Zionist first came has no say in anything.
Which of course are always over ridden by secular law. Given that this is true...which it is...why the alarmism over Sharia law? it's their religion and their business.
You let the camel stick his nose under the tent, pretty soon the whole camel is inside. If you let sharia courts decide any legal matters, eventually we'll have "honor killings" approved by the courts and a civil war when the authorities treat it as a crime under secular law.
It is controversial in other places as well. I could probably back public lashing for corrupt public officials, but publicly stoning folks to death, amputation of hands and crucifixion is certainly not going to be allowed anywhere in the West. Folks that want to live under that law though, can certainly find places to live that operate under that system. But importing it here? Not going to happen.
And like any other breach of OUR laws...they will be punished. Why the fear mongering? - - - Updated - - - All of which is against OUR law and punishable as such. You really needn't worry.
At least 85 Islamic sharia courts are operating in Britain, a study claimed yesterday. The astonishing figure is 17 times higher than previously accepted. The tribunals, working mainly from mosques, settle financial and family disputes according to religious principles. They lay down judgments which can be given full legal status if approved in national law courts. However, they operate behind doors that are closed to independent observers and their decisions are likely to be unfair to women and backed by intimidation, a report by independent think-tank Civitas said. Commentators on the influence of sharia law often count only the five courts in London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton that are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose rulings are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act. But the study by academic and Islamic specialist Denis MacEoin estimates there are at least 85 working tribunals. Mr MacEoin said: 'Among the rulings we find some that advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as applied by British courts.' Examples set out in his study include a ruling that no Muslim woman may marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam and that any children of a woman who does should be taken from her until she marries a Muslim Further rulings, according to the report, approve polygamous marriage and enforce a woman's duty to have sex with her husband on his demand. The report added: 'The fact that so many sharia rulings in Britain relate to cases concerning divorce and custody of children is of particular concern, as women are not equal in sharia law, and sharia contains no specific commitment to the best interests of the child that is fundamental to family law in the UK. 'Under sharia, a male child belongs to the father after the age of seven, regardless of circumstances.' It said: 'Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation.' The study pointed out that the House of Lords ruled in a child custody case last year that the sharia rules on the matter were 'arbitrary and discriminatory'. And a 2003 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg said it was 'difficult to declare one's respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values.' However last year Justice Minister Bridget Prentice told MPs that 'if, in a family dispute ...the parties to a judgment in a sharia council wish to have this recognised by English authorities, they are at liberty to draft a consent order embodying the terms of the agreement and submit it to an English court. 'This allows judges to scrutinise it to ensure it complies with English legal tenets.' Decisions from sharia tribunals can be presented to a family court judge for approval with no more detail than is necessary to complete a two page form. The sharia courts in the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal are recognised as courts under the Arbitration Act. This law, which covers Jewish Beth Din courts, gives legal powers to a tribunal if all parties involved accept its authority. The Civitas study said the Islamic courts should no longer be recognised under British law. Its director Dr David Green said: 'The reality is that for many Muslims, sharia courts are in practice part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation, backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat.' The Muslim Council in Britain condemned the study for ' stirring up hatred'. A spokesman said: 'Sharia councils are perfectly legitimate. There is no evidence they are intimidating or discriminatory against women. The system is purely voluntary so if people don't like it they can go elsewhere.' Patrick Mercer, Tory MP for Newark and chairman of the Commons counter-terrorism sub committee, said: 'We have an established law of the land and a judiciary. Anything that operates otside that system must be viewed with great caution. 'If crimes are going unreported to police, this will erode the authority of those who have to enforce our law. In a sovereign state there must be one law, and one law only.' Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley, said: 'Everyone should be deeply concerned about the extent of these courts. 'They do entrench division in society, and do nothing to entrench integration or community cohesion. It leads to a segregated society. 'There should be one law, and that should be British law. We can't have a situation where people can choose which system of law they follow and which they do not. 'We can't have a situation where people choose the system of law which they feel gives them the best outcome. Everyone should equal under one law.' Veteran Tory Lord Tebbit provoked anger among Muslims earlier this month by comparing Islamic sharia courts to gangsters. He likened the tribunals to the 'system of arbitration of disputes that was run by the Kray brothers'. Lord Tebbit told the Lords: 'Are you not aware that there is extreme pressure put upon vulnerable women to go through a form of arbitration that results in them being virtually precluded from access to British law?' Warning that women could be shut out from the protection of the law, he asked Justice Minister Lord Bach: 'That is a difficult matter, I know, but how do you think we can help those who are put in that position?' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hing-spread-Islamic-justice-closed-doors.html
What part of "But importing it here? Not going to happen." Did you fail to understand? But the Public Lashing of Corrupt Public Employees, I am open to discussion on that point or for folks like this clown: Univ. of Missouri prof arrested for dragging hijab-less teenage girl by the hair. Youssif Zaghwani Omar, an assistant professor at the University of Missouri, was arrested on suspicion of child abuse this past week for allegedly grabbing a 14-year-old female relative by the hair and dragging her into a car after he noticed she wasnt wearing a hijab. Omar was at a local high school when he saw the girl without the Muslim headscarf. http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/25284/ When did the US Campus go completely insane?
I think you missed few points However, they operate behind doors that are closed to independent observers and their decisions are likely to be unfair to women and backed by intimidation, a report by independent think-tank Civitas said. The sharia courts in the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal are recognised as courts under the Arbitration Act. This law, which covers Jewish Beth Din courts, gives legal powers to a tribunal if all parties involved accept its authority. The reality is that for many Muslims, sharia courts are in practice part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation, backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat.'It said: 'Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation.' Lord Tebbit told the Lords: 'Are you not aware that there is extreme pressure put upon vulnerable women to go through a form of arbitration that results in them being virtually precluded from access to British law?' Warning that women could be shut out from the protection of the law, he asked Justice Minister Lord Bach: 'That is a difficult matter, I know, but how do you think we can help those who are put in that position?' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hing-spread-Islamic-justice-closed-doors.html
Are there ‘Sharia courts’ in Britain? While there are undoubtedly lots of different councils and tribunals dealing with Sharia principles, they aren’t courts of law. Most are Sharia ‘councils’ set up to make decisions on purely religious matters, although there are some bodies that mix Sharia principles with legally binding arbitration. But none can overrule the regular courts
What part of Arbitration Act and intimidation don't you understand? - - - Updated - - - At least 85 Islamic sharia courts are operating in Britain, a study claimed yesterday. The astonishing figure is 17 times higher than previously accepted. The tribunals, working mainly from mosques, settle financial and family disputes according to religious principles. They lay down judgments which can be given full legal status if approved in national law courts. However, they operate behind doors that are closed to independent observers and their decisions are likely to be unfair to women and backed by intimidation, a report by independent think-tank Civitas said. Commentators on the influence of sharia law often count only the five courts in London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton that are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose rulings are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act. But the study by academic and Islamic specialist Denis MacEoin estimates there are at least 85 working tribunals. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...hing-spread-Islamic-justice-closed-doors.html
Do Jews practice polygamy like Muslims? Don't think so... Do Jews consider sex being their Allah' given privilege, and rape their wives if they're not willing, like Muslims do? Don't think so... Can Jews divorce their wives by saying 3 times in a public place "I divorce you"? Nope. Can Jews marry a girl for an hour just to be clean in the eyes of their Deity? Don't think so... Do Jews stone their unfaithful wives? Yea, right. All in all, Islam is a great religion for an evil men. If I was one, I'd join it, too.
Thank you Rush Limbaugh. However none of that negates the fact that Sharia law or not...they are subject to OUR laws if they are in OUR country...and in England they are subject English laws.
My name is not Rush Limbaugh. And WTF does Rush Limbaugh has to do with barbaric, uncivilized Muslim ways? Did he wrote them or maybe, he misinterpret them? Hm?
