by Elliot Friedland
The former Bishop of Rochester, who was born and raised in Pakistan, has blasted the government over its review of sharia councils in the UK.
The former Bishop of Rochester lambasted the British government over its review of sharia
law. Ordered while current Prime Minister Theresa May was still home
secretary, the review assesses the role of sharia councils and courts in
the UK.
The
Right Rev Dr. Michael Nazir-Ali, who was born and raised in Karachi,
Pakistan, said that sharia is incompatible with the British justice
system and therefore the review is a waste of time.
The review’s stated goal is “to explore whether, and to what extent, the application of sharia law
may be incompatible with the law in England and Wales. It will examine
the ways in which sharia may be being misused, or exploited, in a way
that may discriminate against certain groups, undermine shared values
and cause social harms.”
Nazir-Ali objected to the reviews focus solely on application, rather than focusing on sharia in general.
“It
asks whether the ‘application’ of sharia is incompatible with English
law, when it should be asking whether sharia itself is incompatible with
English law,” he said in written evidence submitted to the House of
Commons Home Affairs Committee.
“If
sharia is recognised in any way in terms of the public law, it will
introduce a principle of contradiction in the body of the law, which
will cause enormous problems,” he added.
His comments mirror the objections of other groups such as the “One Law For All” campaign, which lobbies for the abolition of faith-based arbitration courts in general and sharia courts in particular.
Yet there is an issue with the approach taken by such campaigners, outlined eloquently by Mohammed Amin, a prominent British Muslim commentator.
In criticizing a private members bill put forward in the House of Lords by anti-sharia campaigner Baroness Cox, he writes the following:
“When
a Shariah council (or an individual religious scholar) gives a ruling
that a particular woman’s religious marriage has ended, despite her
husband not having given her a religious divorce himself, that body is
engaged in a function that is purely religious. The ruling is not given
any recognition by the state, just as the religious marriage itself was
not recognised by the state. The ruling derives any effectiveness that
it may have purely from the willingness of the woman, her future
husband, and their Muslim relatives and friends to regard it as having
some religious significance. It means that the woman and her intended
husband can have a religious marriage and then engage in sexual
intercourse without committing a sin.
The
Arbitration Act 1996 is irrelevant to the operation of the Shariah
council in this case, just as all other state law is irrelevant. The
state can no more tell such a Shariah council how to give its religious
opinions than it can instruct a Roman Catholic priest whether he should
forgive a particular sinner in the confessional booth.”
In
other words, in the eyes of the state, sharia law is not something that
exists in the UK. If individuals agree to bind themselves by a certain
code, of any kind, and the people who arbitrate that code have no means
beyond social pressure to force people to obey, then legally the state
has no ability to prevent that from happening. Nor would it make any
sense for the state to have that power.
In
the eyes of the British government, a sharia marriage is no more a
marriage than a simple verbal agreement between two people who say they
are married. The only rights the sharia courts have are as arbitration
courts, which require the consent of those going to them and function as
any other arbitration courts.
Calls to ban sharia courts, therefore, are foolish and impractical.
Yet
abuses clearly are taking place, which the government acknowledges. How
exactly to deal with that and what changes (if any) the government will
make to existing laws remains to be seen.
A more detailed analysis of the issues surrounding sharia in the UK is covered in Dr. Elham Manea’s excellent book Women and Sharia Law, which specifically looks at some of the human rights problems relating to sharia councils in the UK.
Elliot Friedland
Source: http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/leading-british-bishop-slams-uk-gov%E2%80%99s-sharia-courts-review
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment