Don't demonise sharia courts

According to the Civitas press release, MacEoin has researched the present report on sharia tribunals in the UK by: "Reproduc[ing] a range of fatwas issued by popular online fatwa sites, run out of or accessed through mosques in the UK, and in some cases … from UK Muslim schools," because, he claims, "It is extremely difficult to find out what goes on in these courts" and "these online fatwas can give a good indication of the rulings of sharia courts in Britain."

It might seem perfectly possible in our Wikipedia age to trawl through online fatwas and infer from them a summation of the operations of sharia tribunals, but it would hardly stand up to scrutiny as a piece of serious, reliable work. Nor would it accurately reflect what sharia tribunals mediate on and what sorts of mediated outcomes arise from their involvement.

.... Sharia councils deal mainly with marital disputes, with the most common referrals being from Muslim women who have approached the sharia councils to grant them an Islamic divorce (khul'a) because of the refusal of the husband to agree to do so. [Guardian CiF] Read more

See what Guardian Cif readers think of this post here

Sharia courts: are their rulings breaching British law?

Sharia courts operate in Britain in the shadows. Little is known about them or their rulings or how extensive their network is or the reach of their jurisdiction.

A report this week sheds some light. It reveals that there are not just the main five generally acknowledged to exist — in London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton — there are another 85 operating largely out of mosques.

It also concludes that such courts, or tribunals, are handing down rulings that are likely to breach fundamental principles of British law and it urges the removal of their formal statutory recognition under the Arbitration Act 1996.

Sharia Law or ‘One law for all’? comes from Civitas, the independent think-tank. David Green, its director, says in an introduction to the report: “It cannot be accepted that Sharia councils are nothing more than independent arbitrators guided by faith.

“The reality is that for many Muslims, Sharia courts are part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat.” He adds: “The underlying problem is that Sharia reflects male-dominated Asian and Arabic cultures. [Times Online] Read more See Also: [The Asian News] Read more

Sharia Courts In Britain – Ruling Against British Law?

Given that under Islamic laws, women have few rights, there is rising concern about these Sharia Courts. They meet behind closed doors and apparently don’t maintain any form of records.

Sharia courts have existed in Britain since 2007, primarily in London, Bradford, Birmingham, Coventry and Manchester. The courts’ rulings are legally binding under the 1996 Arbitration Act, on condition that both parties are happy touse them, and as long as their decisions do not contradict British law.

But the Arbitration Act specifically excludes rulings on divorce and child-care cases. Now Civitas notes that many Sharia courts are exceeding the original mandate. [Jew With A View] Read more

College bars visitor wearing veil

.... Mr McMahon said: "Dialogue can only take place if all those in the college are prepared to participate in full communication. "When the policy was explained to them all except one were willing to remove it.

"This lady, a member of staff at the [pupils'] school, refused, and opted to leave the premises. He added the college was committed to promoting understanding between people from different backgrounds. A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain said it was a "trivial issue". [BBC] Read more

St Mary's Catholic College turns away Muslim teacher wearing veil

Abdul Qureshi, chairman of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, said: “It is a sad event but it has happened and we will try to address it and find out why it happened.” Kevin McMahon, the Principal of St Mary’s, said that the college had a policy that people entering the site did not have their faces covered.

He said that at the “taster days” for prospective students some visitors arrived wearing veils. When the policy was explained to them, all except one were willing to remove the veil. “This lady, a member of staff at the school, refused and opted to leave the premises. My colleagues offered to arrange transport but this offer was declined.” [Times Online] Read more

Qaeda warns France of revenge for burka stance

Al-Qaeda's North Africa wing threatened on Tuesday to take revenge on France for its opposition to the burka, calling on Muslims to retaliate against the country, the US monitoring service SITE Intelligence reported.

Earlier this month, President Nicolas Sarkozy said the burka, which covers the whole face, was not welcome in the strictly secular country.

"Yesterday was the hijab (the Islamic headscarf long banned in French schools) and today, it is the niqab (the full veil)," Abu Musab Abdul Wadud, head of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb was quoted as saying.

"We will take revenge for the honour of our daughters and sisters against France and against its interests by every means at our disposal."

The group also called on Muslims to retaliate for what it called French "hostility" against the community and its attempt to obstruct Islam's practice on its territory. [AFP News] Read more

At least 85 sharia 'courts' operating in Britain, says Civitas report

A study by the thinktank found that scores of unofficial tribunals and councils regularly apply Islamic law to resolve domestic, marital and business disputes, many operating in mosques.

It led to claims of a "creeping" acceptance of sharia principles in British law, but the Muslim Council of Britain dismissed the report as "scaremongering". The study follows the outcry over remarks by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, last year that the adoption of aspects of Muslim law in Britain, such as in divorce proceedings, "seems inevitable".

Lord Phillips, who was then the Lord Chief Justice, attracted controversy by saying that there was "no reason why" sharia principles could not form the basis of mediation in disputes. Some decisions of Islamic tribunals are already considered legally binding and could theoretically be enforced in civil courts in England and Wales. [telegraph.co.uk] Read more

Sharia courts in UK giving illegal advice, transgressing human rights

Any surprised? Now that the sharia pandora is out of its box, and apparently out of legal bounds, will UK officials call off their multi-culti death wish or give themselves more rope from which to hang?

Dozens of sharia courts in the UK are regularly giving illegal advice on issues including marriage and divorce, a report published today claims.

Decisions concerning marriages not recognised under English law, polygamy, and disputes regarding children are being made by at least 85 sharia courts, according to the report by the thinktank Civitas.

“Some of these courts are advising illegal actions,” said Denis MacEoin, a former lecturer in Arabic and Islamic studies who wrote the report. “And others transgress human rights standards.” [Creeping Sharia] Read more

Think tank concludes that Sharia courts should not be recognised in Britain

Sharia courts should not be recognised under Britain’s 1996 Arbitration Act, according to a new report from independent think-tank Civitas.

According to Denis MacEoin, author of Sharia Law or ‘One Law For All’?, 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 that derive from the values of the Enlightenment and are inherent in modern codes of human rights. Sharia rulings contain great potential for controversy and may involve acts contrary to UK legal norms and human rights legislation, the report says. [National Secular Society] Read more

Britain has 85 sharia courts: The astonishing spread of the Islamic justice behind closed doors

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.

.... The spread of sharia law has become increasingly controversial since its role was backed last year by Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams and Lord Phillips, the Lord Chief Justice who stepped down last October. Dr Williams said a recognised role for sharia law seemed 'unavoidable' and Lord Phillips said there was no reason why decisions made on sharia principles should not be recognised by the national courts. [MailOnline] Read more

Netherlands: 51% of Muslims considering leaving

More than a third of Turkish and Moroccan Muslims (36%) in the Netherlands want to emigrate due to the increasing popularity of Geert Wilders. More than half (51%) are considering leaving more and more often. This according to a survey by actuality program NCRV Netwerk.

Wilders' PVV party triumphed in the recent EU elections. Netwerk wanted to know what influence this had on the feeling of belonging among Muslims. 76% still feel they belong in the Netherlands, but for a majority of 57% that feeling has decreased, according to the survey which will be shown this evening on the show. Three quarters of the Muslims think it would be a threat if the PVV would be part of the cabinet after the next elections. Strikingly, 90% expect that such a cabinet will be unsuccessful.

Additionally, 75% have a feeling they're judged more negatively than in the past. 40% says they're more often discriminated. 24% says they're regularly discriminated against in the Netherlands. [Islam in Europe] Read more

Catholic school bars Muslim teacher who refused to remove face veil so staff could identify her

A Muslim teacher was barred from visiting a Catholic college after refusing to remove her full-face veil so staff could identify her.

Now the school may face a claim of religious discrimination after the woman left rather than agreeing to reveal her face. The teacher, who works at an Islamic school, was attending an open day at the sixth form college along with two teenage pupils, all of them wearing veils which left only their eyes visible. They were asked to remove them as it was against the college policy - but while the girls complied, their teacher refused.

The incident, which happened in Jack Straw's Blackburn constituency, comes as the issue of the full-face veil is once again at the centre of debate, and could see the school plunged into a court battle. [MailOnline] Read more

The truth about sharia courts

The scary revelation that there are at least 85 sharia courts operating in Britain brought this swift response from the Muslim Arbirtration Tribunal: Qamar Bhatti, a member of the governing body of the MAT, said: “We don’t have a court, it’s an arbitration, we don’t have a judge sitting with a gavel in his hand but that’s the image that this report is creating.” Aha. May I suggest that the MAT might want to redesign its website (see below)? [telegraph.co.uk] Read more

Does God Hate Women?: Do religions enshrine mysogyny? This book has all the answers, but is it asking the right question?

But Benson and Stangroom don't really have religion in general in mind – there's one in particular they're after. True, a few pages deal out blame to the Christian, Jewish and Hindu deities for the misogynistic activities of some of their more extreme devotees. For all the time this book spends excoriating the backward, sexist and barbaric practices it associates with Islam, however, it's clear that the question really exercising the authors is "Does Allah Hate Women?" Not that they need have bothered with the interrogative, as they take no serious account of any arguments that might lead to the answer "no". [independent.co.uk] Read more

The Muslim Menace to Our British Nationality. For Real!

Well, the bigots and racists were wrong back then and I rather fancy they're wrong again today and that, in 80 years time, people will look back upon this era of scaremongering and paranoia and consider it a grubby, shameful episode.

As I say, these matters are not exact and history rarely repeats itself in detail but it's worth bearing in mind that the apocalypse has never lacked for prophets and that, generally speaking, these prophets have subsequently been proved wrong and, in some cases, wicked. [The Spectator] Read more

Veiled threat: The burka, a symbol of repression, has no place in a free society

Among European liberals the burka is seen as a symbol of female subservience. And the freedom to opt for such deplorable status runs counter to other liberties regarded as more important in the hierarchy of freedoms: openness, transparency, equality and opportunity.

Within Western society, the covering of the face negates all such fundamental rights. The mistrust, alienation and brake on communication engendered by a face veil were the basis of Jack Straw's principled but contentious denunciation of the niqab. Such objections apply even more forcefully to the burka. [Times Online] Read more

Veiled threats: row over Islamic dress opens bitter divisions in France

Six months ago she began wearing a loose, floor-length black jilbab, showing only her expertly made-up face from eyebrows to chin. She now wants to add the final piece, and wear full niqab, covering her face and leaving just her eyes visible.

"But this week, after Sarkozy announced that full veils weren't welcome in France, things have got really difficult," she said. "As it is, people sometimes shout 'Ninja' at me. It's impossible to find a job – I'm a qualified childminder and get plenty of interviews because of my CV, but when people see me in person, they don't call back. It's difficult in this country, there's a certain mood in the air. I don't feel comfortable walking around." [guardian.co.uk] Read more

Somalia steps up amputations for criminals

Four men from Somalia have had their hands cut off for stealing phones and guns. Hardline Islamists carried out the sentences on the men after they had been convicted in a Sharia court earlier this week.

Mainly women and children watched as masked men cut off a hand and foot of each of the men with machetes. Witnesses have said the four men cried for help during and after the amputations.

The four men had reportedly admitted to the robberies, but were given no appeal against their sentence. Most Somalis traditionally practise a more tolerant form of Islam but President Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, who took office in January, immediately allowed Sharia law. [Baltimore News.Net] Read more

Voile la difference?

Most British commentators explained the strange (to them) French headscarf ban as being somehow connected to the tradition of laïcité (republican secularism) and, more broadly, to a view of citizenship which stressed conformity and assimilation. But while we congratulated ourselves on our greater national "tolerance", few noticed that a much larger Muslim community in France seemed to produce far fewer terrorists or radicals, and almost no-one seemed aware that the strongest supporters of the ban had actually been Muslim feminists.

The cross-channel difference still exists, as Agnes Poirier (in The Times) noted: For someone like me, firmly on the Left, the defence of secularism is the only way to guarantee cultural diversity and national cohesion. One cannot go without the other. However, when I get on Eurostar to London, I feel totally alien. To my horror, my liberal-left British friends find such a position closer to that of the hard Right.

But the tone this time has been slightly different - partly, perhaps, because in the case of the burqa it is more difficult to pretend that the wearing of it is no more than a simple matter of personal choice. [Heresy Corner] Read more

The burkha should not be banned

There are plenty of reasons to criticise the burkha. It makes some people feel uncomfortable because it denies them face to face contact with the person underneath, while in certain situations, such as checking in at airports, it is clearly inappropriate. Some women are forced or pressured to wear it, while their husbands and male relatives go around uncovered. There is not even Qur’anic justification for it. Yet do these objections mean that it should be banned? No. There are two reasons for this: the practicality of such a ban, and the loss of liberty.

Enforcing such a ban would be hard. Would we have police ripping off women’s clothes if their faces were covered? Pregnant women and young mothers put behind bars for repeatedly defying the ban? Would anyone who covered their face up be breaking the law? Would Darth Vader impersonators be held? How much face would have to be covered up for it to be illegal? [Pickled Politics] Read more

Banning the Burka and the BNP - the edge of tolerance

Mr Sarkozy certainly knows how to stir things up. For a number of political reasons his statements about the form of dress from Afghanistan used to enforce visual apartheid between men and women ( mostly at the expense of the women - only Japanese Ninja's seem keen on covering up. If the visual sight of someone's face is such a problem how come its always the women who have to walk around in an inverted sack ? ).

Sarko has his argument thought through to some extent, pointing out that the burka didn't exist in the time of the religion of Islam's prophet Mohamed, which points out the hypocrisy nicely of some of the Islamacist movements people who's first question on anything is "What did Mohamed do ?" - which outlaws music, TV etc but not apparently RPG's or Kalashnikovs.

His logic appears to have been accepted by the UK pressure group the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) who counter in terms of feelings and perceptions, rather than an argument about their scriptures. After all this line of self generating grievance, where the self appointed victim can say their feelings are beyond question and must mean changes to everyone else's behaviour. [Man in a Shed] Read more

Daily Express calls for banning the burqa

The niqab and burqa debate sparked off by Nicolas Sarkozy’s comments on Monday continues apace in today’s papers.

The Daily Express informs us that both Muslims and non – Muslims want Britain to ban the burqa. Their sources of authoritative commentary? Among others, the rabid neo-con Douglas Murray and Ghaffar Hussain of the Quilliam Foundation. What a surprise. Murray tells the Express that a religious defence of the burkha is “completely bogus”, and that “there are parts [of the Qur’an] which speak of modesty but not this complete covering up. This idea that it is a religious requisite is only put forward by the extremists.”

But you see, those defending the rights of women to wear the burqa aren’t doing so on the basis of a religious edict, but a liberal one. How a woman interprets verses on modest dress is her business, and whether she opts for a headscarf, a niqab, a burqa, or none of the above, is her business and her business alone. In proscribing her ability to exercise such a right Murray is no different to the extremists who compel Muslim women to observe dress codes not of their choosing. [ENGAGE] Read more

Why I, as a British Muslim woman, want the burkha banned from our streets

I was born in this country, and my parents' greatest desire for me was that I would integrate and take advantage of the British education system.

They wanted me to make friends at school, and be able to take part in PE lessons - not feel alienated and cut off from my peers. So at home, I wore the salwar kameez, while at school I wore a wore a typical English school uniform.

Now, to some fundamentalists, that made us not proper Muslims. Really? I have read the Koran. Nowhere in the Koran does it state that a woman's face and body must be covered in a layer of heavy black cloth. Instead, Muslim women should dress modestly, covering their arms and legs.

Many of my adult British Muslim friends cover their heads with a headscarf - and I have no problem with that. The burkha is an entirely different matter. It is an imported Saudi Arabian tradition, and the growing number of women veiling their faces in Britain is a sign of creeping radicalisation, which is not just regressive, it is oppressive and downright dangerous. [MailOnline] Read more

How to ban the veil?

Answer: find some co-operative Muslims who will agree with you, and promote their views as representative of the community. That way you neatly deflect accusations of racism. So we have the Express asserting that "both Muslims and non-Muslims" advocate a ban, while the Daily Mail wheels out Saira Khan, who writes in terms that could just as easily be found on some far-right website:

"In hardline Muslim communities right across Britain, the burkha and hijab – the Muslim headscarf – are becoming the norm.... Thanks to fundamentalist Muslims and 'hate' preachers working in Britain, the veiling of women is suddenly all-pervasive and promoted as a basic religious right. We are led to believe that we must live with this in the name of 'tolerance'. [Islamophobia Watch] Read more

Why the burka is part of Britain: Modern moderate Muslims feel banning such religious clothing would prove counter-productive

Imagine this scene at the next State Opening of Parliament. The Queen is standing in front of the assembled Lords and Commons, reading from the speech prepared for her by the Prime Minister. "My Government," she says in that familiar high-pitched but colourless voice, "will ban the burka. It is not welcome in Britain. In our country we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen."

The sound of jaws dropping would be audible at the Channel ports. And yet, only two hours' train journey away, it is possible for President Sarkozy to make such an announcement (for Britain, of course, read France). And these weren't off-the-cuff comments. He picked the first time both the National Assembly and Senate have met in one place for nearly 150 years – at the Palace of Versailles, no less – to launch his attack on this form of Muslim dress. [telegraph.co.uk] Read more