Sauda17
Junior Member
Archbishop of Canterbury argues for Islamic law in Britain
The Archbishop of Canterbury came under fierce attack last night from the Government, his own Church and other religions after he advocated the adoption of parts of Sharia, or Islamic law, in Britain.
Leaders of all the main political parties made clear that they did not accept Dr Rowan Williams’s assertion that the incorporation of some aspects of Sharia was “unavoidable”.
Trevor Phillips, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, also condemned his comments as “muddled and unhelpful.”
One senior bishop said that he was “surprised and concerned” by Dr Williams’s remarks.
Even the Muslim Council of Britain insisted that most Muslims in Britain did not want Sharia and emphasised that the organisation had not discussed the issue.
Dr Williams argued, in a speech at the Royal Courts of Justice, for a “plural jurisdiction” that would allow Muslims to choose whether some legal disputes were resolved in secular or Sharia courts. He called for “constructive accommodation” over such issues as resolving marriage disputes.
Earlier in the day, he told BBC Radio 4 that people should approach Islamic law with an open mind.
Although emphasising that there was no place for “extreme punishments” and discrimination against women in Britain, Dr Williams underlined the importance of making all communities in Britain “part of the public process” in order to limit any oppression.
There are nearly 1.6 million Muslims in Britain, representing 2.7 per cent of the total population. Sharia courts do exist, but they have no legal standing and their decisions are not binding.
Dr Williams said: “It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Sharia are already recognised in our society.”
However, a spokesman for the Prime Minister said that British law must be based on British values. “Sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breach-es of English law, nor should the principles of Sharia be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes,” he said.
Gordon Brown’s spokesman added that concessions had been made in specific instances – such as a relaxation of the law on stamp duty, to avoid it being paid twice when Sharia-compliant mortgages were used by Muslims.
They involve two transfers of property – so in theory stamp duty would be payable twice, but is in fact paid only once.
The Conservative response was even tougher. Baroness Warsi, Shadow Minister for Community Cohesion and Social Action said: “The Archbishop’s comments are unhelpful and may add to the confusion that already exists in our communities.
“Of course we must ensure that people of all backgrounds religions are treated equally before the law. Freedom under the law allows respect for some religious practices.
But let’s be absolutely clear. All British citizens must be subject to British laws developed through Parliament and the courts.”
Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: “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.”
Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, a Leicester imam and an expert in interfaith issues for the Muslim Council of Britain, said his fear was that Islamophobic and racist groups would use the Archbishop’s remarks to attack Islam.
He added: “I welcome debate on this issue but my personal feeling is that the vast majority of Muslims do not want to see a parallel or separate system for Muslims in our society.”
Rabbi Danny Rich, chief executive of Liberal Judaism, said: “He’s lost the plot. I am staggered he has actually said this. The Jewish community has learnt the value both of participating in the British legal system but at the same time, in certain matters where the state gives it the right, to sort out those matters with its own rabbinic authorities. But we accept British law has priority.”
Mr Phillips observed that the proposals were not even supported by the Muslim community. He said: “As far as I am aware, no serious body of Muslim opinion supports the idea of special treatment, or exemption from the law of the land based on some vague ‘conscientious objection’.
“Raising this idea in this way will give fuel to anti-Muslim extremism and dismay everyone who is working towards a more integrated society.”
The Archbishop was delivering the first lecture in a series of discussions Islam in English Law, part of the Temple Festival. In a lecture titled Civil and Religious Law in England, Dr Wiliams was attempting to look at what space can be allowed alongside the secular law of the land for the legal provisions of faith groups.
He insisted: “Sharia is not intrinsically to do with any demand for Muslim dominance over non-Muslims.”
The Archbishop of Canterbury came under fierce attack last night from the Government, his own Church and other religions after he advocated the adoption of parts of Sharia, or Islamic law, in Britain.
Leaders of all the main political parties made clear that they did not accept Dr Rowan Williams’s assertion that the incorporation of some aspects of Sharia was “unavoidable”.
Trevor Phillips, chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, also condemned his comments as “muddled and unhelpful.”
One senior bishop said that he was “surprised and concerned” by Dr Williams’s remarks.
Even the Muslim Council of Britain insisted that most Muslims in Britain did not want Sharia and emphasised that the organisation had not discussed the issue.
Dr Williams argued, in a speech at the Royal Courts of Justice, for a “plural jurisdiction” that would allow Muslims to choose whether some legal disputes were resolved in secular or Sharia courts. He called for “constructive accommodation” over such issues as resolving marriage disputes.
Earlier in the day, he told BBC Radio 4 that people should approach Islamic law with an open mind.
Although emphasising that there was no place for “extreme punishments” and discrimination against women in Britain, Dr Williams underlined the importance of making all communities in Britain “part of the public process” in order to limit any oppression.
There are nearly 1.6 million Muslims in Britain, representing 2.7 per cent of the total population. Sharia courts do exist, but they have no legal standing and their decisions are not binding.
Dr Williams said: “It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Sharia are already recognised in our society.”
However, a spokesman for the Prime Minister said that British law must be based on British values. “Sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breach-es of English law, nor should the principles of Sharia be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes,” he said.
Gordon Brown’s spokesman added that concessions had been made in specific instances – such as a relaxation of the law on stamp duty, to avoid it being paid twice when Sharia-compliant mortgages were used by Muslims.
They involve two transfers of property – so in theory stamp duty would be payable twice, but is in fact paid only once.
The Conservative response was even tougher. Baroness Warsi, Shadow Minister for Community Cohesion and Social Action said: “The Archbishop’s comments are unhelpful and may add to the confusion that already exists in our communities.
“Of course we must ensure that people of all backgrounds religions are treated equally before the law. Freedom under the law allows respect for some religious practices.
But let’s be absolutely clear. All British citizens must be subject to British laws developed through Parliament and the courts.”
Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, said: “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.”
Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, a Leicester imam and an expert in interfaith issues for the Muslim Council of Britain, said his fear was that Islamophobic and racist groups would use the Archbishop’s remarks to attack Islam.
He added: “I welcome debate on this issue but my personal feeling is that the vast majority of Muslims do not want to see a parallel or separate system for Muslims in our society.”
Rabbi Danny Rich, chief executive of Liberal Judaism, said: “He’s lost the plot. I am staggered he has actually said this. The Jewish community has learnt the value both of participating in the British legal system but at the same time, in certain matters where the state gives it the right, to sort out those matters with its own rabbinic authorities. But we accept British law has priority.”
Mr Phillips observed that the proposals were not even supported by the Muslim community. He said: “As far as I am aware, no serious body of Muslim opinion supports the idea of special treatment, or exemption from the law of the land based on some vague ‘conscientious objection’.
“Raising this idea in this way will give fuel to anti-Muslim extremism and dismay everyone who is working towards a more integrated society.”
The Archbishop was delivering the first lecture in a series of discussions Islam in English Law, part of the Temple Festival. In a lecture titled Civil and Religious Law in England, Dr Wiliams was attempting to look at what space can be allowed alongside the secular law of the land for the legal provisions of faith groups.
He insisted: “Sharia is not intrinsically to do with any demand for Muslim dominance over non-Muslims.”