241 Pizza

David Green, director of the think-tank Civitas, points out that the Sharia councils operate under provisions that “allow citizens in a free society to settle their disputes on a voluntary basis if they so wish.

“But that legislation assumes that both parties are regarded as being equal. I think the problem is with tribunals like these is that you can’t always be sure that women would be treated equally.”

So when Sharia consent orders are put before a judge for approval, they will be given short judicial shrift if any decision does not comply with the law. More difficult, though, is for the judges to determine whether any decision has involved parties who are completely willing.

There are further difficulties. What if the parties appeared willing, but the results were nonetheless unfair? In one recent inheritance dispute in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was split between three daughters and two sons — with the sons getting twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with Sharia. The UK courts would not condone such an unequal split.

Worse, the women in such a case might never dare to bring forward the decision for approval. That is the crux of the problem. And if they do, there is a danger that a judge might unwittingly approve a decision that is inherently unfair — and contrary to UK equality principles.

Michael Penning, the MP who prompted the parliamentary answer, still has concerns. “This whole area worries me. I had a constituent who had a Muslim cleric [although it need not be a cleric] visit her and tell her that she was no longer married. How can that fit with our law?”

The minister’s clarification, he said, did not answer the problem of the many decisions that might never even come before the courts to be scrutinised by a judge.

Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, is speaking this Wednesday at a conference in London on Islamic finance and trade. He could — although it is not planned — touch on the status of Sharia councils.

So far, attempts from the Archbishop of Canterbury to ministers to clarify a highly sensitive topic have only fuelled fears that a parallel and conflicting legal jurisdiction is being allowed to grow.

At the same time, attempts to assert the authority of UK law leave many questions unanswered. Chief of these is how to condone or assimilate a resolution system based on assumptions that contradict the basic human rights underpinning our society.

Explore Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Law Reports

• Student Law

Times Recommends

• BGC 'set aside £40m to lure Tullett brokers'
• Legal aid review to ensure value
• Fears as 21 magistrates' courts face closure