Mick Hartley

Reporting on the launch of the One Law for All campaign against Sharia law in Britain:

The One Law for All campaign was launched at the House of Lords on International Human Rights Day, 10 December, 2008. It draws attention to the problems of Sharia and was offered help by Parliamentarians last night to explore possible legislative changes, for example to curb the activities of Sharia councils and tribunals. The Canadian Province of Ontario has reacted to similar problems by outlawing all religious tribunals.

Campaign organiser, Maryam Namazie commented: “Even in civil matters, Sharia law is discriminatory, unfair and unjust, particularly against women and children. Moreover, its voluntary nature is a sham; many women will be pressured into going to these courts and abiding by their decisions. These courts are a quick and cheap route to injustice and do nothing to promote minority rights and social cohesion. Public interest, particularly with regard to women and children, requires an end to Sharia and all other faith-based courts and tribunals.”

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.

And:

New legislation may be needed to curb the activities of informal sharia courts that are operating in Britain, said the organisers of the One Law For All campaign, which was launched at the House of Lords this week…

Of particular concern was whether women were being coerced into using these courts and tribunals against their best interests.

NSS Vice President and chairperson of the Lawyers Secular Society, Carla Revere, explained how the Sharia Councils and Arbitration Systems differed and how they were ruling on family matters — divorce, child custody and inheritance matters — that were outside their legal scope. She quoted Justice Minister Jack Straw, who said in Parliament recently, in response to a question about sharia law courts in the UK: “Arbitration is not a system of dispute resolution that may be used in family cases. Therefore no draft consent orders embodying the terms of an agreement reached by the use of a Sharia council have been enforced within the meaning of the Arbitration Act 1996 in matrimonial proceedings”. Therefore the decisions of Muslim Arbitration Tribunals are not legally binding in that they are not enforceable in the UK courts.

Gina Khan, a secular Muslim who has been fighting for justice on these issues, spoke of her own and her family’s experiences at the hands of sharia justice. She spoke passionately about the way extremists within the Muslim community were exerting control through giving the impression that “real Muslims” would settle their disputes using only “God’s Sacred Law”. This, she said, led to injustice to Muslim women, many of whom didn’t know they had rights in British civil courts.

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.”