Archbishop sparks UK Sharia law row

[GOTFIVEONIT]

for the record, in countries like India, seperate Muslim personal laws, and seperate personal laws based on religion are enshrined in India's constitution, article 37 to be exact. This has proven to be politically controversial, esepcially after the 1986 divorce case of Shah Bano, who was expelled from her home by her husband, after he simply recited talaq three times. The Hindu-Fundamentalist BJP party siezed upon this issue and has ever since been calling for a uniform civil code in matters related to marriage and divorce.





Dr Williams made his comments in a BBC radio interview

"All British citizens must be subject to British laws developed through Parliament and the courts" - Baroness Warsi. Conservative Party

"He should be concentrating on winning souls into the Church of England rather than getting involved in politics" - Conservative Party MP Mark Pritchard

Last Updated: Thursday, 7 February 2008, 20:46 GMT

Archbishop sparks Sharia law row

Leading politicians have distanced themselves from the Archbishop of Canterbury's belief that some Sharia law in the UK seems "unavoidable".

Gordon Brown's spokesman said the prime minister "believes that British laws should be based on British values".

The Tories called the archbishop's remarks "unhelpful" and the Lib Dems said all must abide by the rule of law.

Dr Rowan Williams said the UK had to "face up to the fact" some citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

He said adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law could help social cohesion.

For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

'Changes'

But the prime minister's official spokesman said Sharia law could never be used as a justification for committing a breach of English law, nor could the principle of Sharia law be applied in a civil case.

He added that Mr Brown had a good relationship with the archbishop, who was perfectly entitled to express his views.

Home Office Minister Tony McNulty said: "To ask us to fundamentally change the rule of law and to adopt Sharia law, I think, is fundamentally wrong."

And Culture Secretary Andy Burnham told BBC One's Question Time: "This isn't a path down which we should go.

"You cannot run two systems of law alongside each other," he said, adding this would be "chaos".

For the Conservatives, shadow community cohesion minister Baroness Warsi said the archbishop's comments were "unhelpful".

"Dr Williams seems to be suggesting that there should be two systems of law, running alongside each other, almost parallel, and for people to be offered the choice of opting into one or the other," she told BBC News 24. "That is unacceptable."

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg said he had "an enormous amount of respect" for Dr Williams, but could not agree with him on this issue.

Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader
Download the reader here

"Equality before the law is part of the glue that binds our society together. We cannot have a situation where there is one law for one person and different laws for another.

"There is a huge difference between respecting people's right to follow their own beliefs and allowing them to excuse themselves from the rule of law."

Trevor Phillips, who chairs the Equality and Human Rights Commission said the "implication that British courts should treat people differently based on their faith is divisive and dangerous".

"It risks removing the protection afforded by law, for example, to children in custody cases or women in divorce proceedings," he said.

"There is a fundamental principle here when you appear before a court in Britain you appear as a citizen, equal to any other and you should be treated equally to any other."

'Sensational'

Dr Williams said Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

In an interview with BBC correspondent Christopher Landau, he argued this relied on Sharia law being better understood. At the moment, he said "sensational reporting of opinion polls" clouded the issue.

Send us your commentsHe stressed that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well".

But Dr Williams said an approach to law which simply said "there's one law for everybody and that's all there is to be said, and anything else that commands your loyalty or allegiance is completely irrelevant in the processes of the courts - I think that's a bit of a danger".

"There's a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law, as we already do with some other aspects of religious law."

Dr Williams added: "What we don't want either, is I think, a stand-off, where the law squares up to people's religious consciences."

"We don't either want a situation where, because there's no way of legally monitoring what communities do... people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression inside a community."

Multiculturalism 'divisive'

Under English law, people may devise their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party as long as both sides agree to the process.

Muslim Sharia courts and the Orthodox Jewish courts which already exist in the UK come into this category.

Muhammad Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation, welcomed Dr Williams's comments, saying they "further underline the attempts by both our great faiths to build respect and tolerance".

He added: "Sharia law for civil matters is something which has been introduced in some western countries with much success. I believe that Muslims would take huge comfort from the government allowing civil matters being resolved according to their faith."

Ibrahim Mogra, of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "We're looking at a very small aspect of Sharia for Muslim families when they choose to be governed with regards to their marriage, divorce, inheritance, custody of children and so forth."

He added: "Let's debate this issue. It is very complex. It is not as straight forward as saying that we will have a system here."

But Mark Pritchard, Tory MP for the Wrekin, in Shropshire, said the archbishop's comments were "naive and shocking" and he accused him of "pseudo-theological appeasement".

He said: "The archbishop should be standing up for our Judeo-Christian principles that underpin British criminal law that have been hard fought for.

"He should be concentrating on winning souls into the Church of England rather than getting involved in politics."

[asma1234]

The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams says the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable".


Dr Williams told BBC Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Dr Williams argues that establishing Sharia law in the UK would help maintain social cohesion.

In an exclusive interview ahead of a lecture to lawyers in London later on Monday, Dr Williams proposes that Muslims be able to choose whether to have issues like marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in Sharia-compliant proceedings or the existing legal system.

Dr Williams argues this relies on Sharia law being better understood. At the moment, he says "sensational reporting of opinion polls" clouds the issue.

He stresses that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states".

Comment:

While some Muslims are debating if there is such a thing as Sharia law, non-Muslims are saying that its imposition is simply a matter of time in the west, so imagine the situation in the Islamic lands. Its time for us as Muslims to explain to non-Muslims what exactly is Sharia law.

[asma1234]

Saw this on the news and on question time, this is certainly going to be the hot topic for the next few days. Also quite a lot of views bit no opions yet for this topic.

I think the Archbishop has an angenda in raising this topic, maybe promote the role of the churches influence upon society by using Sharia law and its limited application with the Muslim communities in the west.

[Jamroll]

Salam Asma,

There's already a thread on this topic, so this will be merged. Please try and do a search function before you post, so that we can avoid multiple threads on the same story.

[asma1234]

o sorrry, i didnt see that been posted, my mistake!

[Jamroll]

asma1234 said

o sorrry, i didnt see that been posted, my mistake!

No worries.

I think a lot of the reaction to this is of the defensive knee-jerk variety. They're running wild with their imagination, painting pictures of amputations and beheadings. They need to look at what actually's being proposed before they reject it.

[asma1234]

lol, true but am just learning where to post what topics! gets abit confusing at time through! lol

[GOTFIVEONIT]

well they have been talking about this now for the last two days on bbc world news. it shows alot about british news too, along with international news. its pretty good, i like it.

in fact the best thing that i love about the bbc, is an independent, foreign view of american politics. especially by thier white house reporter, matt frei. its amazing and refreshing from the propoganda i usually see in the american media. american journalists, used to be the way matt frei is.

[IbnMardhiyah]

What's hilariously ironic is the reaction of the politicians.

UK is the only western country I know of that has officially altered its national laws to allow Islamic banking to be put into actual practice by both Islamic and non-Islamic banks. You would think then, that those same elected figures and politicians who - after plenty of due diligence - altered their own laws to allow a sub-set of Sharia Law to come into existence in their own country ... would behave more maturely in this matter at hand.

But ... as ma boy Upton Sinclair said:

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”

[Pushpa]

BBC NEWS | UK | Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.

For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

'Other loyalties'

Dr Williams added: "What we don't want either, is I think, a stand-off, where the law squares up to people's religious consciences."
"We don't either want a situation where, because there's no way of legally monitoring what communities do... people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression inside a community."

The issue of whether Catholic adoption agencies would be forced to accept gay parents under equality laws showed the potential for legal confusion, he said.

"That principle that there is only one law for everybody is an important pillar of our social identity as a western democracy," he said.

"But I think it is a misunderstanding to suppose that means people don't have other affiliations, other loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and that the law needs to take some account of that."

'Custom and community'

Dr Williams noted that Orthodox Jewish courts already operated, and that the law accommodated the anti-abortion views of some Christians.

"The whole idea that there are perfectly proper ways the law of the land pays respect to custom and community, that's already there," he said.

People may legally devise their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party as long as both sides agree to the process.

Muslim Sharia courts and the Jewish Beth Din which already exist in the UK come into this category.

The country's main Beth Din at Finchley in north London oversees a wide range of cases including divorce settlements, contractual rows between traders and tenancy disputes.

Dr Williams's comments are likely to fuel the debate over multiculturalism in the UK.

Last month, the Bishop of Rochester, the Right Reverend Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, said some places in the UK were no-go areas for non-Muslims.

Dr Williams said it was "not at all the case that we have absolute social exclusion".

Listen to the interview: BBC Media Player

[Jamroll]

Please search it's your friend, and so on and so forth.

Merged.

[roberto]

Pushpa said

BBC NEWS | UK | Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Dr Rowan Williams told Radio 4's World at One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

Dr Williams argues that adopting parts of Islamic Sharia law would help maintain social cohesion.

For example, Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court.

He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

'Other loyalties'

Dr Williams added: "What we don't want either, is I think, a stand-off, where the law squares up to people's religious consciences."
"We don't either want a situation where, because there's no way of legally monitoring what communities do... people do what they like in private in such a way that that becomes another way of intensifying oppression inside a community."

The issue of whether Catholic adoption agencies would be forced to accept gay parents under equality laws showed the potential for legal confusion, he said.

"That principle that there is only one law for everybody is an important pillar of our social identity as a western democracy," he said.

"But I think it is a misunderstanding to suppose that means people don't have other affiliations, other loyalties which shape and dictate how they behave in society and that the law needs to take some account of that."

'Custom and community'

Dr Williams noted that Orthodox Jewish courts already operated, and that the law accommodated the anti-abortion views of some Christians.

"The whole idea that there are perfectly proper ways the law of the land pays respect to custom and community, that's already there," he said.

People may legally devise their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party as long as both sides agree to the process.

Muslim Sharia courts and the Jewish Beth Din which already exist in the UK come into this category.

The country's main Beth Din at Finchley in north London oversees a wide range of cases including divorce settlements, contractual rows between traders and tenancy disputes.

Dr Williams's comments are likely to fuel the debate over multiculturalism in the UK.

Last month, the Bishop of Rochester, the Right Reverend Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, said some places in the UK were no-go areas for non-Muslims.

Dr Williams said it was "not at all the case that we have absolute social exclusion".

Listen to the interview: BBC Media Player

Extracted from Uproar over Archbishop's sharia law stance - Telegraph


Amid the storm of protest, Downing Street moved quickly to distance itself from the Archbishop's remarks, insisting that British law would and should remain based on British values.

A spokesman for Mr Brown said: "Our general position is that sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breaches of English law, nor should the principles of sharia law be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes.

If there are specific instances like stamp duty, where changes can be made in a way that's consistent with British law and British values, in a way to accommodate the values of fundamental Muslims that is something the Government would look at.

"But the Prime Minister believes British law should apply in this country, based on British values."

Former Labour home secretary David Blunkett said that sharia law would be "catastrophic" for social cohesion in Britain.

[roberto]

[QUOTE=Pushpa;83251]BBC NEWS | UK | Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

Sharia law in UK is 'unavoidable'

He says Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Yeah let’s legalise honour killings, forced marrige etc

[Pushpa]

Sorry Jammie I was being lazy.

OK, so plenty of exposure on the story, but what does everyone think about it?

I think some of the Archbishop's comments were ill-thought out. To say that Muslims don't 'relate' to British law is a VERY sweeping statement and implies that Muslims don't want to be subject to British law. I hope this is not what he meant.

I think he was trying to spark a dialogue about the issue, and he has certainly got people talking about it. What that Tory MP, Mark Pritchard, said is rubbish - nobody is calling for a subversion of the 'Judeo-Christian principles that underpin British criminal law'; the only sphere in which a discussion about sharia in Britain would have any meaning is in the domain of personal / family law, and even then it would be a matter of individual personal conscience as to whether people wanted to act in accordance with sharia principles in matters of child custody/inheritance and so forth.

for the record, in countries like India, seperate Muslim personal laws, and seperate personal laws based on religion are enshrined in India's constitution, article 37 to be exact. This has proven to be politically controversial, esepcially after the 1986 divorce case of Shah Bano, who was expelled from her home by her husband, after he simply recited talaq three times. The Hindu-Fundamentalist BJP party siezed upon this issue and has ever since been calling for a uniform civil code in matters related to marriage and divorce.

In this case it does not sound as though Sharia law has been correctly implemented in the first place, so what it shows is not that separate personal laws are the problem, but that the correct implementation of them by fair and knowleedgeable people is not happening. The answer is not necessarily a uniform civil code in such matters, but correct education and training in the relevant religious laws and to ensure that they are not exploited. That would go for any country or state which wanted to adopt a similar way of doing things.

[Pushpa]

roberto said

Yeah let’s legalise honour killings, forced marrige etc

um, those are not religious or cultural practices, they are rather grossly perverted interpretations of what culture requires.

And I really don't think that's what he meant with reference to 'cultural loyalties'. But a lot of his comments were very vague which is what sparked the uproar in the first place. He should have been clearer.