Frances Gibb, Legal Editor of the Times
Enter our Snapshots of Summer photography competition
Sharia or Islamic law cannot trump the fundamental principles of English law even if the Archbishop of Canterbury wants to adopt some of its aspects, lawyers say.
Muslims can already decide to have disputes settled according to Sharia in private arbitration, but they cannot ignore or abandon the basic human rights and responsibilities entrenched in the laws of this country, the lawyers said. They also gave warning that moves towards recognising aspects of Sharia could lead to a dual legal system.
But the Archbishop of Canterbury’s remarks could pave the way to recognition of Sharia Councils, local groups set up to advise Muslims on matrimonial and other problems and mediate, in the way that the Beth Din, the Jewish Court, arbitrates certain disputes between Orthodox Jews.
Another possible impact of his comments might be to allow Muslim marriages to be recognised, without requiring couples to have a civil Register Office ceremony.
David Pannick, QC, one of Britain’s top human rights and public law barristers, said: “If the Archibishop of Canterbury means that Muslims can choose to have certain disputes settled according to their own law, by binding arbitration [what some call a Sharia court], then they can do this now, in the same way that some Jewish people have their disputes settled in the Beth Din.
“But such transfer of jurisdiction is subject to public policy considerations. That means that the fundamental standards of fairness, of human rights which underpin our laws cannot be abrogated. They can’t just be ditched, whether a person is male, female, black or white. If the Archibishop is saying this, then that is fundamentally wrong.”
Matters of criminal law, for instance, could not be adjudicated privately, he said. Nor could marriages under UK law be dissolved under Sharia law. “That would lead to the breakdown of society, if some groups of people could just ignore laws that applied to others.
“But if Muslims want to have a commercial or family dispute resolved by private arbitration, that can already be done.”
Gerald Butler, QC, a retired senior circuit judge, said: “I am not clear what the Archbishop is saying. Is he suggesting two parallel legal systems — and if so, why not for the Hindus or the Jews? It’s the strangest thing I’ve ever heard.”
He added: “There’s nothing wrong with two Muslims voluntarily agreeing to have a dispute settled privately by arbitration under Sharia, but of course, if there was a problem over payment or enforcing the agreement, it would have to come back to our courts — even though their methods of enforcement might be rather more effective.”
Ian Edge, director of the Centre of Islamic and Middle East Law (CIMEL), said that he would want to study what the Archbishop had said before commenting. But in general, there was a debate to be had over whether — for instance — Sharia Councils should be recognised.
“At present these are not formalised and not even recognised by some Muslims. But if they were unified as is the Beth Din, the Jewish Court, then there may be an argument for recognising that they can resolve certain disputes within the Islamic community.”
He added that there was also a strong case for giving recognising as valid a Muslim marriage ceremony, without requiring a civil Register Office ceremony to take place.
“Muslims are disadvantaged in this respect in a way that Anglicans, Quakers, Jews, Catholics, are not,“ he said.
“The result of this is that sometimes such marriages take place outside the law entirely, which can leave women, for instance, at a disadvantage. So there is a case for bringing Muslims within English law by recognising their marriages.”
Jeremy Rosenblatt, a barrister specialising in international child law, said: “If the Archbishop is merely talking about giving some recognition to Sharia marriage or divorce — but excluding the allowing of multiple wives — then that is one thing.”
The Jewish “get”, the orthodox divorce, was incoporated into the law in this country in the sense that if a husband refused to grant it to his wife then she could refuse him a decree absolute, he said. “But if we are talking about recognising aspects of Shaira that allow for multiple wives, for example, that is very concerning.”
Articles from our sister site WSJ.com:
You may be asked to subscribe to read certain articles
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
There are about 1.6 million mislims in this country. It is a lot of people and having something in common, of course they want it to be recognized by otheres. But what about other 58 million people who have nothing in common with Islam and who, more importantly, don't want to have anythng in common with it?
Artemi, Redhill, UK
It's about time we kicked Rowan and the other Lords Spiritual out of the House of Lords and introduced proper division between church and state. Roll on an elected Upper Chamber, as per the March 2007 Commons vote.
We should be working toward a secular legal system, not trying to find ways to introduce Iron Age mythology into it. We need to extract religion from the law, and then everyone really will be able to enjoy justice without the infiltrating perversions of dogma.
Ali, Conwy,
The Laws of the land should trump all other laws always. Religion has to kept as a private thing for people. Keep it out of the courts.
colm, cork, ireland
Of course, as much as we decry any fragmentation of the Rule of law, it remains the cas ethat the Scotish System is Roman, the English Common law in origin, the Welsh (possibly) moving towards federal law, and the Northern Irish have been without juries (since the advent of the Diplock courts) since the seventies...in this context the idea of the law of the land does not seem a terribly meaty concept?
David Marusza, islington, england
Ironic, a people who have not come as far as Magna Carta,are with the approval of the leading Anglican cleric , sriving to take Britain back to those same ancient days.
Earl Dewey, Wallingford, CT/USA
Thank you, Ms Gibb. That settles it. "The law of the land is the law" - the Beth Din too operates with that proviso. And that's how it should be.
Julia Iskandar, London, England
Our president, is a perfect example of the carnage that results from combining faith with power.
Robert Bauer, Santa Rosa, California, USA
We already have a working legal system in this Country, if you don't like it, go somewhere that have laws you approve of. Williams should keep his nose out of legal matters and try to justify his outrageous wages some other way.
Dave Anderson, York, North Yorkshire
Once again a Bleeding Heart Churchman puts his silly foot in it!
Never heard anything so utterly stupid in all my life!!
Simon F, Newcastle,
Going to a registry office to have a marriage legalised if living in the UK is hardly a great ordeal is it.
It is hardly a matter of human rights, the law as it stands is not causing any suffering to anyone, unless a bus ride to local town hall and the signing of a few papers is just too much for people to bear.
Clare, St Ives, UK
We could of course change it the other way around and ensure that all couples have to go through a civil Register Office ceremony for it to be upheld under british law. This is the practise in some European countries.
Charlotte, London,
I agree. Sharia is indeed the respected way to deal with Islamic indifferences; however, this is Britian, and no matter what ethnicity one is, who they are, where they are from, the British legal system should apply to all. I think its absurd to even suggest the concept of a dual legal system; one for Muslims and one for the others. As is said above, why not then have one for Hinduism, or Judaism? Muslims are already eligible for their own private settlement, which is fantastic, exhibiting the multi-cultural society Britain is; however, they are bound by British law, no matter what the consequence, and for this reason, The Archbishop of Canterbury needs to reconsider his claims, as the British legal system should be the only legal system that is followed in Britain.
Sam Hills, Norwich, Norfolk
Personally I think that many things that are being said these days are peoples personal opinions and should stay just that personal .
If Muslims wish to adopt the Sharia law then as it states they can do that in private arbitration However this is the UK and the law of the land prevails so if you choose to live anywhere in the land then dont expect everything to be changed to adapt individual needs or wants . Thats not fair the masses .
carla, croydon ,