 The Muslim extremist planning a march through Wootton Bassett runs a secret sharia court where he marries hundreds of couples – then tells them not to register their weddings. Anjem Choudary tells them that registering their marriages is forbidden in Islam, as it would be recognition of British law.
But critics said he was leaving women open to abuse, as they could not go to a normal court to escape a violent husband or win their share in a divorce.
Mr Choudary’s Islam 4 UK group wants to carry 500 coffins through the Wiltshire town to remember Afghans killed by Britain and America.
He styles himself the judge of the UK Sharia Court and principal lecturer of the London School of Sharia and has claimed that he runs a network of Islamic courts in London, Luton, Birmingham, Derby and Leicester.
He claims that he has married more than 1,800 couples across Britain in less than ten years and conducted hundreds of divorces.
He spoke out to Douglas Murray, who has written a research paper on sharia law in the UK for the Charles Douglas Home Memorial Prize.
Mr Choudary, 42, did not give addresses for any of his sharia courts or his college.
Asked if he told newly-weds to register their weddings, he said: ‘No. Because once you’ve gone down that road of registering the marriage...you are automatically really saying, “Look, we are accepting the [non-Islamic] system that goes with it”.’
Last night women’s groups and moderate Muslims accused Mr Choudary of giving ‘dangerous’ advice to couples.
They said if marriages are not registered, men can take further wives.
Mr Murray said: ‘There are lots of very vulnerable women who have been deceived by this man. They are being told not to register their marriages so that they don’t have any rights as a wife in the eyes of the law in Britain.
‘The Government must not be frightened by accusations of Islamophobia and political correctness and ensure there is one law followed in Britain.’
Imam Shahid Raza, one of Britain’s leading sharia judges, said: ‘As far as I know, Mr Choudary does not have the right qualifications to qualify as a sharia judge.’ He said this ‘could not be condoned’.
Mr Choudary, estimated to claim £25,000 a year benefits, has written to dead soldiers’ families, saying he has ‘no sympathy for them whatsoever’.
This weekend he could not be reached for comment.
 By JAMES HOOKWAY and CELINE FERNANDEZ KUALA LUMPUR :If a Malaysian High Court ruling stands, Roman Catholics here can resume using the word "Allah" as their translation for God in their local language. The court on New Year's Eve overturned a three-year-old government ban that prevented the Catholic Church from using the term Allah in its literature.
The Arabic word has been used by various faiths in this Muslim-majority nation for centuries, and the church argues that it is the only suitable way to denote God in the Malay language. Other options, such as "Tuhan," or Lord, aren't as appropriate, says Rev. Lawrence Andrew, the editor of the church's Herald newspaper. He called Judge Lau Bee Lan's decision a landmark ruling that upholds constitutional guarantees of freedom of speech and religion. But some people fear the ruling is only the first round in what they see as a longer campaign by a broad spectrum of Muslims to make this religiously diverse, resource-rich nation more Islamic.
Prosecutors could file an appeal as soon as Monday, and Islamic activists already are demanding the ruling be overturned. A government spokesman couldn't be reached to comment. The linguistic dispute over the word Allah comes amid a flurry of other controversies that have convinced many Malaysians that their country is adopting an increasingly politicized interpretation of Islam. Some analysts fear it could eventually turn off international investors. In recent months, a Muslim Shariah court sentenced a woman who ordered a beer in a hotel bar to be caned, while a group of Muslim men desecrated the proposed location of a Hindu temple near Kuala Lumpur by tossing a severed cow's head onto the site as police stood aside. The increasingly religious bent of Malaysia's authorities contrasts sharply with the country's reputation as a holdout for moderation in the Islamic world.
Malaysia's diverse makeup -- around 60% of Malaysia's 27 million people are ethnic-Malay Muslims, while the rest are mostly ethnic-Chinese and Indians -- has encouraged trade and investment. For a while, the Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur were the tallest buildings in the world, and the country hosts a large technology industry in addition to sprawling palm oil plantations and natural-gas reserves. The character of the country has changed, however. As Islam emerged as a political force across the Muslim world, Malaysian leaders encouraged the spread of Shariah courts and a Muslim-dominated bureaucracy. The ruling, however, adds to signs that some Malaysians may be ready to push back against the Islamist tide, or at least act to prevent it from becoming more powerful, observers say. In an interview in November, Prime Minister Najib Razak said the government would resist efforts by Islamist hard-liners to turn Malaysia into a more-radical Islamic nation. "We are going to maintain what we are today -- a moderate Muslim state," Mr. Najib said. The Herald newspaper filed a lawsuit against the government's ban on it using the word Allah in 2007. Malaysian authorities were concerned that the word would confuse or mislead Muslims, and that the term should be reserved exclusively for Islam. The ban hindered the Malay-language edition of the Herald, which is read mostly by indigenous tribes who converted to Catholicism and other forms of Christianity. It added to the grievances of Malaysia's religious minorities, who complain they are discriminated against by the Muslim-dominated government -- a claim the government denies. The ban on Christians using the word Allah was imposed before Mr. Najib became prime minister, and some observers suggest he might not want to pursue the case in order to help improve religious relations.
The Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party, a key member of an opposition coalition, already has urged its followers to respect the court's verdict. Muslim activists have grown more powerful, however, and the government may be unable to resist pressure to appeal the Allah ruling, observers say. WSJ
 Only Islamophobes oppose this sort of thing, right? Wrong. As one Muslim woman who opposes the plan said, "It's being advertised as this opt-in system when it actually isn't." That's true not only on an individual level, but for the broader process of creeping Sharia in the West. "Sharia law tribunal is proposed," from BBC News, December 10
Wales could get its first court based on Islamic law under proposals from a Muslim body, BBC Wales has learned. A Sharia law tribunal in Cardiff will help community relations and give some Muslims services they want, supporters have told the Dragon's Eye programme. But some commentators, such the think-tank Civitas, say a Muslim arbitration tribunal undermines the concept of one law for UK citizens. A women's group said it was not needed and women may not be treated fairly. [...] A recent report by Civitas was critical of Sharia courts, saying they were not in keeping with UK legal principles. Denis MacEoin, of Civitas, said: "It is Sharia law that is given the prominent position and this effectively means that British law is shoved to one side. "All citizens have the right to be judged under a single legal system, and that we didn't bring in the legal system by the back door and that is effectively what is happening at the moment." Some fear that Muslim women may become isolated from their communities if they do not choose the tribunal system. Marya Shabir, of the Welsh Women's National Coalition, said: "It's being advertised as this opt-in system when it actually isn't. "If a Muslim woman is given the option of using a Muslim Arbitration Tribunal over going through the courts system using the law of England and Wales; there's no question as to which system she's going to use. "If she doesn't go with the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, she is going to face stigmatisation, she will be ostracised by her community, her peers, her family who believe she is turning her back on the community." And we all know what can happen then. With thanks to JihadWatch
 Police have seen 'honour' crime surge by 40 per cent due to rising fundamentalism, new figures show.
Honour-based violence, including crimes like murder, rape and kidnap has rocketed in London during the past year.
Reported instances of intimidation and attempts at forced marriage have also increased by 60 per cent.
A report into the scale of the problem by Scotland Yard found there were 161 honour-based incidents recorded in 2007-8, of which 93 were criminal offences.
But in 2008/9 the number of incidents had risen to 256, with 132 being criminal offences.
The latest figures indicate that the trend is continuing, with 211 incidents reported in the last six months until October, of which 129 were offences - more than double the number in the same period last year.
Police define honour crimes as offences motivated by a desire to protect the honour of a family or community.
Diana Nammi, of the Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organisation, said the group is now dealing with four times more complaints relating to honour than two years ago.
She said: 'More women are coming forward. They are becoming more aware of their rights in the UK, that there is help available and they feel confident enough to report matters to the police.
'But I also think cases and violence are increasing.
'One reason is the rise in fundamentalism. The problem is increasing in communities around the UK.
'We are seeing a rise not only in honour killings, but also in female genital mutilation and polygamy.'
She added: 'The rise in Sharia courts is another indication of more fundamental beliefs.
'There must be more support from the Government to organisations who are working to combat this problem.'
(more)
Source: Daily Mail
Islam in Europe
 BARNEY ZWARTZ A SENIOR Melbourne Muslim is proposing a sharia court to handle disputes in the Muslim community, suggesting it might eventually form part of the state's legal structure. Islamic Council of Victoria board member Hyder Gulam was due to meet a senior bureaucrat in the Premier's Department on Thursday to discuss the idea, but the meeting was postponed to this week. Mr Gulam, a lawyer with Logie-Smith Lanyon and also a board member of Australian Red Cross, said a sharia court could function as a voluntary and non-binding dispute resolution mechanism in matters such as divorce, access to children, disputes over wills and financial or commercial disputes. ''We are talking about a system that defuses community tensions before they reach litigation, so it can be settled at the lowest level, as quickly as possible, as cost-effectively as possible, with the best outcome. The Victorian Government is very keen on community dispute resolution mechanisms,'' he said. ''These are ideas we've raised with senior members of the community for three months, and the response has been very supportive because people see it's a cheap way to deal with intra-community disputes.'' However, the Islamic Council of Victoria has rejected the idea, because of concerns about the negative impact of the word ''sharia''. The leading Muslim women's group also rejected it. On Friday a deeply concerned council vice-president Sherene Hassan learnt of it from The Age and held urgent phone conversations with other board members.
She said: ''Sharia courts are not on the organisation's agenda. There has been no pressure for them from the Muslim community, and we have not discussed them. The meeting with the Premier's Department this week will go ahead, but it will not discuss sharia courts.'' Ms Hassan said Mr Gulam was acting on his own initiative and the council's agenda would not be set by one individual. Mr Gulam discusses the possibility of an Australian sharia court in an article co-written with barrister Simon Lee in an Australian Muslim newspaper, the Crescent Times. Saying their aim is to stimulate debate, they conclude the only element of sharia law feasible in Australia is dispute resolution based on mediation and conciliation. Meanwhile, Mr Gulam has received support and advice from the Fitzroy Legal Service on securing government support. Executive officer Rob Inglis said a sharia court ''would fill a really important need and would be a win-win situation''. It would not diminish existing law, but help create a ''safer, more culturally inclusive space'' for Muslims in legal matters. Mr Gulam said the Jewish community had the Beth Din, Catholics had religious courts to settle marriage questions, and indigenous people had the Koori courts, which were part of the state legal system. Islamic Women's Welfare Council of Victoria director Joumanah El Matrah said research showed women and children would be ''extremely disadvantaged'' by any sort of sharia court. ''It's grossly naive to say women can opt out from such a tribunal. Women are often not in a position to make this sort of decision.'' She said examples from Britain showed women not only felt pressured, they became caught between the tribunal and the laws of the state. ''There's no sound argument to establish such a tribunal. Muslims are bound to live by the laws of the state they are members of. They can't opt in and out, according to their convenience.'' Source: The Age
 MOGADISHU, Somalia — Six masked men used machetes to carry out amputations on three men accused of robbery by a Somali Islamist court, a witness said Saturday. Abdulahi Hassan Afrah said the two of the men had both a hand and a foot cut off and a third had only a foot cut off after the Islamic court in the southern port city of Kismayo realized he was already disabled.
He said a crowd of around 400 people, mainly women and children, watched the sentence carried out Friday on the three screaming young men. "It was most painful thing I have ever seen," he said. A spokesmen for the al-Shabab militia, Sheik Hassan Yaqub Ali, said the three had admitted robbing passengers on board a truck heading to Kismayo. None of the three were allowed to appeal the sentence or had access to a lawyer. The Islamic courts were originally set up to try to counter the bloody chaos of Somalia's 18-year-old civil war. Initially their harsh judgments were welcomed by many of the war-weary population and in 2006 the courts formed the basis for an Islamist administration that controlled much of the capital and southern Somalia. But the Islamist government was toppled in December 2006 by Ethiopian troops supporting the weak U.N.-backed government, and the Islamists launched a bloody insurgency. The courts are still active in areas under Islamist control, including many neighborhoods in the capital. In 2008, the courts in Kismayo ordered a 13-year-old gang rape victim to be stoned to death.
But amputations and public floggings are more common. Source: AP H/T: WeaselZippers
 KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, (AP) – A Muslim woman sentenced to caning for drinking beer wants to get the punishment over with now that it has been confirmed by an Islamic appeals court judge, her father said Tuesday. If the punishment is carried out, Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno, a 32-year-old mother of two, would become the first Muslim woman to be caned in Malaysia, where about 60 percent of the 28 million people are Muslims. The case has ignited a debate in this moderate Muslim-majority country whether conservative Islamists, who advocate harsh punishments, are gaining influence over the justice system and whether Islamic laws should intrude into people's private lives. According to local media reports Monday, chief Judge Abdul Hamid Abdul Rahman of Pahang state's Shariah courts decided to uphold the sentence passed by the state high court on Kartika after a one-month review of the case. No date was immediately set for the caning. Kartika's father, Shukarno Abdul Muttlib, 60, told The Associated Press that while the family had yet to be informed of the judge's latest decision, his daughter "accepts the punishment" and would like it to be carried out sooner rather than later. "We obey the law," he said, adding that "it's a challenge ... (but) it's the way of my life." Pahang court and religious department officials declined to talk about the case Tuesday. Others could not immediately be reached. Kartika, a former model and nurse, was sentenced in July to six strokes of the cane and a fine of 5,000 ringgit ($1,400) for drinking beer in December 2007 at a beach resort in violation of Islamic laws. Islam prohibits Muslims from drinking alcohol. Kartika, who pleaded guilty, refused to appeal her sentence and was on the verge of being caned on Aug. 24. But the punishment was halted at the last minute following an uproar in the media and among rights activists. Instead, the government asked the Shariah High Court Appeals Panel in Kuantan, the capital of Pahang, to review the verdict. Judge Abdul Hamid, who headed the panel, ruled that the sentence was correct and should go forward. The caning would be done with a thin stick on the back and would be largely symbolic rather than aimed at causing pain, unlike the caning of rapists and drug smugglers with a thick rattan stick on bare buttocks that causes the skin to break and leave scars. Deputy Home Minister Abu Seman Yusop said the prisons department has trained personnel who can carry out the caning in accordance with Islamic rules. The date and time for the whipping will have to be decided by the court first, he said. Malaysia follows a dual-track justice system. Shariah laws apply to Muslims in all personal matters. Non-Muslims — Chinese, Indians, Sikhs and other minorities — are covered by civil laws, and are free to drink. Only three states in Malaysia — Pahang, Perlis and Kelantan — impose caning for drinking alcohol. In the other 10 states it is punishable by a fine. Source: Asharq Alawsat
 Would it be such a terrible thing if sharia courts existed in the Netherlands? Yes, says Nahed Selim, we have to stop giving in to the Islamic fundamentalists. No, says Maurits Berger, we already have Jewish and Catholic 'courts'.By Nahed Selim Sharia law in the Netherlands may not be practised in an actual 'sharia court', but that makes little difference. The point is that Islamic rules about marriage, divorce, custody, parental authority, alimony and inheritance are being implemented according to the sharia, and that these contradict Dutch law. The clearest example of this is polygamy. Marriages are made and dissolved in mosques in the Netherlands, including polygamous marriages. On September 19, 2008, newspaper De Telegraaf reported that 173 men in Amsterdam are registered as having two legal wives, two men even have three wives. A spokesperson for the city of Rotterdam admitted in NRC Handelsblad last year that polygamous marriages are being registered in that city on an almost weekly basis. Read more ... Source: NRC HandelsbladNahed Selim
Latest recipients of The MASH Award
 In March of last year a severely autistic man with the mental age of three married a woman in Bangladesh, via the telephone. Three of Britain’s most senior judges intervened, ruling the marriage could not be legal under English law, as the man was unable to give his consent. This marriage, said Lord Justice Thorpe, was “sufficiently offensive to the conscience of the English court that the court should refuse to recognise it and should refuse to give effect to the law of Bangladesh and sharia law.” Only six months later, sharia courts that had formerly operated illegally in Britain were reclassified as “tribunals” under the Arbitration Act, allowing them to pass effectively legally binding judgments in many civil matters. However, with sharia law incompatible with English law and modern human rights norms, concerns were rightly raised that the sharia court system in Britain would grow into a parallel legal system. The disparity between English and sharia law was highlighted only a month later, as the House of Lords passed judgment in the case of a Lebanese woman who had claimed the right to remain in the UK with her son. An earlier Lebanese court decision, under sharia law, meant that, despite a history of abuse, her former husband would get automatic custody of the child when he turned seven. Lord Hope of Craighead observed that under the sharia judgment, “[…] there is a real risk of a flagrant denial of their article 8 rights [of the European Convention on Human Rights] if the appellant and her child were to be returned to Lebanon.” Lord Bingham of Cornhill added, rather triumphantly, that her case was supported “[…] by JUSTICE and Liberty.” Justice and liberty, Lord Cornhill appeared to say, are not supported by sharia. Not even in civil cases. For, in sharia, the rights of the man supersede the rights of the woman and children, Muslims are privileged over non-Muslims, and – where sharia is the dominant or sole form of law – cruel punishments, including death by stoning, hanging, etc., are meted out for adultery, homosexuality, apostasy, etc. Although it has generally been thought that five sharia courts were operating in Britain, just over a week ago Civitas revealed that there are now at least 85 sharia courts operating across the country. Read more here.... Source: Brussels Journal
 Making their case:
At an Islamic centre in East London, Sheik Haitham Al-Haddad talks to two women about divorce issuesBy Edna Fernandes In a shabby converted sweetshop in Leyton, East London, a group of burka-clad Muslim women sit in a waiting room. They have an appointment with Dr Suhaib Hasan at his twice-weekly surgery. The women look worried. There is no talking in the airless reception area - the only sound is a fan purring quietly in the corner as temperatures outside exceed 80F. Inside, the atmosphere is just as stifling. There are no magazines, television or other diversions. The beige walls are bare except for a flow-chart depicting the process of securing a Muslim divorce, and a picture of Mecca. This is no GP's surgery or Citizens Advice Bureau. Within these non-descript walls lies the nerve centre of sharia law in Britain, the headquarters of the Islamic Sharia Council, which oversees the growing number of Muslim courts operating in Britain. Read more ...Source: Daily MailH/T: Weasel Zippers
 By Jonny Paul Dozens of Islamic courts operating in the United Kingdom are "seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation," according to a report published by London think tank Civitas on Monday. Denis MacEoin, author of the Civitas report "Shari'a Law or One Law For All?" wrote that Shari'a rulings contained great potential for controversy and could involve acts contrary to UK legal norms and human rights legislation. According to the report, Shari'a courts should not be recognized under Britain's 1996 Arbitration Act, as they claim authority over the private lives of individuals in a way that is contrary to the British tradition. "Among the rulings, we find some that advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as applied by British courts," MacEoin wrote. Examples set out in the study include a ruling that no Muslim woman may marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam, and that any children of a woman who does should be taken from her until she marries a Muslim. Read more ...Source: Jerusalem PostH/T: Islamist Watch
 The use of Sharia courts – those driven by Islamic law - in Great Britain is far more widespread than previously believed, and it raises troubling questions about human rights and equal protection under the law, according to a new study by Civitas, an independent British think-tank. Five Sharia courts – in London, Manchester, Birmingham, Bradford, and Nuneaton -- are generally acknowledged to exist in the country today. But Civitas researchers found that there are another 85 such courts operating largely out of mosques. The study concludes that such courts or tribunals are issuing rulings that breach basic principles of British law and calls for removal of their formal legal recognition under Arbitration Act 1996 (c. 23), one of the nation's most important legal statutes. "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," Civitas Director David Green writes in an introduction to the report. "It cannot be accepted that Sharia councils are nothing more than independent arbitrators guided by faith." The reality, Green adds, "is that for many Muslims, Sharia courts are part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat." Read more ...Source: IPT Blog
By Steve Doughty | 29th June 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.
 Disputes: Islamic leaders rule on disagreements
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. Commentators on the influence of sharia law often count only the five courts in London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton that are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose rulings are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act. But the study by academic and Islamic specialist Denis MacEoin estimates there are at least 85 working tribunals. 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. But the Civitas report said the principles on which sharia courts work are indicated by the fatwas - religious decrees - set out on websites run by British mosques. Read more here... Source: Daily Mail
John R. Bowen Two years ago, Amina, a Muslim woman, approached a religious teacher near her home outside London. She wished to divorce her husband. They had married in Pakistan, moved to England, and later separated. Amina was planning to file for divorce in court, but wanted proof that she was divorced religiously in case she wished to remarry. The teacher referred her to London’s Islamic Sharia Council, and earlier this year, at one of their monthly meetings at the Regents Park Mosque, the six Islamic scholars sitting as the Council took up her case. Their first aim, as with Islamic judges in other countries, was to save the marriage. But Amina’s husband had not answered entreaties to appear before them. As a result they agreed to dissolve the marriage, and officially informed Amina of their decision. With their letter, she should be able to remarry in a country practicing Islamic law—for example, her native Pakistan. Should she remarry in England, she will be able to satisfy relatives and neighbors (and perhaps herself) that she has not sinned. Read more ...Source: Boston Review
KUALA LUMPUR, March 5, 2009 (AFP) - An ethnic Chinese Malaysian has gone to court to fight the secret conversion of his 15-month-old daughter by his estranged Muslim convert wife, his lawyer said Thursday. Carpenter Hoo Ying Soon, 28, is also challenging the temporary custody granted to his wife by a sharia court in this Muslim-majority nation. Lawyer Tang Jay Son told AFP Hoo only learned of his wife and child's secret conversion two days ago through a sharia court notice, which said the woman had become a Muslim on January 28 and his infant daughter on February 3. Read more ...Source: AFPH/T: Jihad Watch
 Man is publicly caned (photo: Islam Watch)A Sharia High Court has sentenced a man and a woman to caning for drinking beer. Malaysians Mohamad Nasir Mohamad, a 38-year-old father of four, and 22-year-old waitress Noorazah Baharuddin, were each discovered last year consuming beer in Pahang bars. Part-time model Sari Dewi Shukarno, a 32-year-old resident of Singapore, faces similar accusations, according to the New Straits Times. Pahang's Sharia High Court fined Mohamad and Baharuddin each $1,400 and ordered that they be publicly whipped for their crimes. "The caning is to shame them and should be done at any of the prisons in the country," judge Abdul Rahman Yunus told the Times. The punishment is intended to deter others from consuming alcohol, he said. The judge also sentenced two Muslim brothers to six cane strokes in 2005 after they drank alcohol. The brothers are still appealing his decision. Read more ...Source: WND
 Sharia divorces should be recognised by courts and the Government, according to one of the country's most senior legal figures.By Martin Beckford Baroness Butler-Sloss, the former head of the Family Division, called for judges to stop granting civil divorces to separating Muslim couples unless they had already been through a religious divorce. She claimed the move would end the "injustice" of women being left unable to remarry if their husband refused to grant them a divorce, because under Islam only men have the power to end marriages. In a debate that she chaired on Islam and English Law at London's Temple Church, Lady Butler-Sloss, England's first female Appeal Court judge, called for ministers to change the law for Muslims, so that a decree absolute could not be issued by a civil court until evidence had been obtained of a sharia divorce. This would extend to Muslims the rights created for Jews under the Divorce (Religious Marriages) Act 2002, to prevent obstructive husbands withholding divorces from their wives. Under Islam, a woman cannot issue the talaq to end a marriage except in rare circumstances. She can ask a sharia council to dissolve the marriage but in doing so she would forfeit part of her financial rights. Read more ... Source: TelegraphElizabeth Butler-Sloss
Latest recipient of The Dhimmi Award
 Press Release
Call for End to Sharia Courts After Report Shows Widespread Injustice
December 16, 2008
A new report showing that Muslim women are discriminated against and encounter gross bias when they subject themselves to Sharia adjudications was welcomed today (news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7783627.stm) by The One Law for All Campaign, which is supported by a variety of organisations and individuals.
The campaign's spokesperson Maryam Namazie said: 'This research reinforces our own findings that Sharia Councils and Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are discriminatory and unfair. However, the solution to the miscarriages of justice is not the vetting of Imams coming to the UK as the report has recommended but an end to the use and implementation of Sharia law and religious-based tribunals.' She added: 'At present these Sharia-based bodies are growing and appear to have some sort of official backing. But they are leading to gross injustices among women who are often unaware of their rights under Britain's legal system.'
This perspective was reiterated in the One Law for All Campaign's launch on December 10, 2008 in the House of Lords at which Maryam Namazie and campaign supporters Gina Khan, Carla Revere, Ibn Warraq and Keith Porteous Wood spoke; the meeting was chaired by Fariborz Pooya, head of the Iranian Secular Society.
Gina Khan, a secular Muslim, said: 'Under British law we are treated as equal and full human beings. Under the antiquated version of Sharia law that Islamists peddle, we are discriminated against just because of our gender. These Islamists use our plight by meddling in issues like forced marriages, domestic violence and inheritance laws for their own political agenda. To allow them to have any sort of control over the lives of Muslim women in British communities will have dire consequences.' She added: 'Sharia courts must be a pressing concern not just for Muslims but for all those living in Britain. Anyone who believes in universal human rights needs to stand united against the discrimination and oppression visited upon Muslim women.'
Carla Revere, Chairperson of the Lawyers' Secular Society, said: 'Such self-appointed, unregulated tribunals are gaining in strength; they increasingly hold themselves up as courts with as much force as the law of the land, but are not operating with the same controls and safeguards. They appear to be operating in the area of family law and some even in criminal matters, where they have no right to make binding decisions as they claim to do. Even if the decisions were binding, UK courts do not uphold contractual decisions that are contrary to UK law or public policy. We call on the Government and legal establishment to stand up for the vulnerable and tackle this significant and growing problem, rather than ignoring it.'
Writer Ibn Warraq said: 'Sharia does not accord equal rights to Muslim women- in regards to marriage- she is not free to marry a non-Muslim, for instance; in regards to divorce, custody of children, inheritance, the choice of profession, and freedom to travel, or freedom to change her religion. In other words, Great Britain in allowing Sharia courts has contravened the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, and all the other more legally binding United Nations' Covenants on Discrimination and the Rights of Women... Multiculturalism is turning communities against each other, it is fundamentally divisive. We need to get back to the principles of equality before the law, principles that so many people fought so hard to achieve for so long.'
Keith Porteous Wood, Executive Director of the National Secular Society, said: 'Sharia is becoming a growth industry in Britain, putting growing pressure on vulnerable people in the Muslim community to use Sharia councils and tribunals to resolve disputes and family matters, when they could use the civil courts. Sharia law is not arrived at by the democratic process, is not Human Rights compliant, and there is no right of appeal.'
Writer Joan Smith who was unable to speak at the launch sent the following message: 'This campaign is very important because many people in this country - including politicians - have yet to realise the isolation of many Muslims, particularly women, from the wider society. Some of them are already under intolerable pressure from their families, and the principle of one law for everyone is a protection they desperately need. That's why I give this campaign my whole-hearted support.'
To find out more or support the One Law for All Campaign against Sharia Law in Britain visit www.onelawforall.org.uk.
You can also listen to Maryam Namazie's debates with Sidiqqi, head of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, on BBC 5 Live and with Muslim lawyer Aina Khan on BBC Radio 4 Women's Hour here:
http://www.onelawforall.org/mediacoverage.html
To listen to Gina Khan's speech at the December 10, 2008 One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain launch, click here:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=J6mvv2ZCTKs&feature=channel_page
To listen to Maryam Namazie's speech at the December 10, 2008 One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain launch, click here:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=I_GIdnJGKEQ
To listen to Carla Revere's speech at the December 10, 2008 One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain launch, click here:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=gDgMB6URugg&feature=channel
To listen to Ibn Warraq's speech at the December 10, 2008 One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain launch, click here:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=Nx8sO6c5JcY&feature=channel_page
To listen to Keith Porteous Wood's speech at the December 10, 2008 One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain launch, click here:
http://de.youtube.com/watch?v=CMg49Smhj1k&feature=channel_page
Some of the signatories to the Campaign:
Nazanin Afshin-Jam, Coordinator, Stop Child Executions Campaign, Canada
Mina Ahadi, Spokesperson, Council of Ex-Muslims of Germany; Coordinator, International Committee against Stoning, Köln, Germany
Sargul Ahmad, Activist, Women's Liberation in Iraq, Canada
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Writer, Washington, DC, USA
Mahin Alipour, Coordinator, Equal Rights Now - Organisation against Women's Discrimination in Iran, Stockholm, Sweden
Homa Arjomand, Coordinator, International Campaign against Sharia Courts in Canada, Toronto, Canada
Farideh Arman, Coordinator, International Campaign in Defence of Women's Rights in Iran, Malmo, Sweden
Abdullah Asadi, Executive Director, International Federation of Iranian Refugees, Sweden
Ophelia Benson, Editor, Butterflies and Wheels, USA
Susan Blackmore, Psychologist, UK
Nazanin Borumand, Never Forget Hatun Campaign against Honour Killings, Germany
Roy Brown, Past President, International Humanist and Ethical Union, Geneva, Switzerland
Ed Buckner, President, American Atheists, USA
Marino Busdachin, General Secretary, Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization, Netherlands
Center for Inquiry, USA
Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, UK
Council of Ex-Muslims of Germany, Germany
Council of Ex-Muslims of Scandinavia, Sweden
Caroline Cox, Peer, House of Lords, London, UK
Austin Dacey, Representative to the United Nations, Center for Inquiry-International, USA
Shahla Daneshfar, Central Committee Member, Equal Rights Now - Organisation
against Women's Discrimination in Iran, London, UK
Richard Dawkins, Scientist, Oxford, UK
Patty Debonitas, TV Producer, Third Camp against US Militarism and Islamic
Terrorism, London, UK
Deeyah, Singer and composer, USA
Nick Doody, Comedian, UK
Sonja Eggerickx, President, International Humanist and Ethical Union, Belgium
Afshin Ellian, Professor, Leiden University Faculty of Law, Leiden, Netherlands
Equal Rights Now - Organisation against Women's Discrimination in Iran, Sweden
European Humanist Federation, Belgium
Tarek Fatah, Author, Chasing a Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State, Toronto, Canada
Caroline Fourest, Writer, France
Tahir Aslam Gora, Writer and journalist, Canada
AC Grayling, Writer and Philosopher, London, UK
Maria Hagberg, Chair, Network against Honour-Related Violence, Gothenburg, Sweden
Johann Hari, Journalist, London, UK
Christopher Hitchens, Author, USA
Farshad Hoseini, Activist, International Campaign against Executions, Netherlands
Khayal Ibrahim, Coordinator, Organization of Women's Liberation in Iraq Arabic Anchor for Secular TV, Canada
International Committee against Executions, Netherlands
International Committee against Stoning, Germany
International Humanist and Ethical Union, UK
Iranian Secular Society, UK
Shakeb Isaar, Singer, Sweden
Maryam Jamel, Activist, Women's Liberation in Iraq, Canada
Keyvan Javid, Director, New Channel TV, London, UK
Alan Johnson, Editor, Democratiya.com, Lancashire, UK
Mehul Kamdar, Former editor of The Modern Rationalist, USA
Naser Khader, Founder, Association of Democratic Muslims, Denmark
Hope Knutsson, Chair, Sidmennt, Icelandic Ethical Humanist Association, Iceland
Hartmut Krauss, Editor, Hintergrund, Germany
LAIQUES - Région PACA, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
Stephen Law, Editor, Royal Institute of Philosophy journal, London, UK
Shiva Mahbobi, Producer, Against Discrimination TV Programme, London, UK
Houzan Mahmoud, Abroad Representative, Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq, London, UK
Doreen Massey, Peer, House of Lords, London, UK
Anthony McIntyre, Writer, Ireland
Caspar Melville, Editor, New Humanist magazine, London, UK
Bahar Milani, Activist, Children First Now, London, UK
Tauriq Moosa, Writer, Capetown, South Africa
Reza Moradi, Producer, Fitna Remade, London, UK
Douglas Murray, Director, Centre for Social Cohesion, London, UK
Taslima Nasrin, Writer and activist
National Secular Society, London, UK
Never Forget Hatun Campaign against Honour Killings, Germany
Samir Noory, Writer; Secular TV Manager, Canada
David Pollock, President, the European Humanist Federation, London, UK
Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan, Pakistan
Fahimeh Sadeghi, Coordinator, International Federation of Iranian Refugees-Vancouver, Vancouver, Canada
Michael Schmidt-Salomon, Chief Executive Officer, Giordano Bruno Foundation, Germany
Udo Schuklenk, Philosophy professor, Queen's University, Canada
Sohaila Sharifi, Editor, Unveiled, London, UK
Issam Shukri, Head, Defense of Secularism and Civil Rights in Iraq; Central
Committee Secretary, Left Worker-communist Party of Iraq, Iraq
Bahram Soroush, Founding member, Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, London, UK
Peter Tatchell, Activist, London, UK
Hamid Taqvaee, Central Committee Secretary, Worker-communist Party of Iran
Union des Familles Laïques - section Arles-Istres, France
Union des Familles Laïques - section Marseille-Aix-en-Provence, France
Afsaneh Vahdat, Coordinator, Council of Ex-Muslims of Sweden, Stockholm, Sweden
Marvin F. Zayed, President, International Committee to Protect Freethinkers, Ottawa, Canada
For more information, please contact Maryam Namazie, email: onelawforall@gmail.com, telephone: 07719166731; website: onelawforall.org.uk. Source: One Law For All
 A woman seeking a divorce in an Islamic court in London as the judge, Suhaib Hasan, talks with her husband by phoneBy Elaine Sciolino The woman in black wanted an Islamic divorce. She told the religious judge that her husband hit her, cursed her and wanted her dead. But her husband was opposed, and the Islamic scholar adjudicating the case seemed determined to keep the couple together. So, sensing defeat, she brought our her secret weapon: her father. In walked a bearded man in long robes who described his son-in-law as a hot-tempered man who had duped his daughter, evaded the police and humiliated his family. The judge promptly reversed himself and recommended divorce. This is Islamic justice, British style. Despite a raucous national debate over the limits of religious tolerance and the pre-eminence of British law, the tenets of Shariah, or Islamic law, are increasingly being applied to everyday life in cities across the country. Read more ...Source: IHT
The Pakistani Taliban have killed a married woman after pronouncing her guilty of committing "adultery" in the troubled northwestern Swat valley, and warned women in an adjoining tribal area against applying for national identity cards. The Taliban tried the woman in a 'Shariah court' in Matta sub-district of Swat for allegedly committing adultery and found her guilty. They then asked her brother-in-law to shoot her dead in their presence. The brother-in-law killed the woman on Sunday by spraying bullets at her, The News daily reported on Monday. The Taliban have been running Shariah courts in areas controlled by them and punishing people with impunity. The courts have given death sentences and punished "criminals" with public flogging. The militants also put up posters at Landi Kotal in the Khyber tribal region warning women against visiting offices of the National Database and Registration Authority to apply for identity cards. Read more ...Source: Rediff
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
The Muslim extremist planning a march through Wootton Bassett runs a secret sharia court where he marries hundreds of couples – then tells them not to register their weddings.
Posts
