Archbishop controversy

2008-02-13 00:00

British deliberations on how better to assimilate the country’s Muslim minority have been unsettled by the head of the Church of England, who said the application of sharia, or Islamic law, in Britain is becoming unavoidable.

Rowan Williams’s remarks have provoked a national outcry and elicited a cool response from the government, which, under Gordon Brown, has been trying to reverse the tendency toward Muslim segregation.

But among British Muslims, the reaction has been far more mixed.

Some, particularly women, say they don’t want any kind of sharia justice in Britain. Others say an informal system of Islamic legal arbitration already functions happily alongside British common law (as do traditional Jewish tribunals).

Many praise the archbishop for thoughtfully trying to reach out across a faith divide that sharpened after the July 7, 2005 attacks and express sadness at the knee-jerk vilification of him.

“We are not calling for sharia and saying we must have it,” says Raza Nadim of the mainstream Muslim Public Affairs Committee. “We welcome the debate, but it’s sad that someone who is trying to help Muslims and non-Muslims integrate is being painted as the extremist.”

Yunes Tainaz, a former adviser to the London central mosque, said he congratulated Williams “for his sincere and brave stand” and insisted that sharia could help social cohesion and obviate cultural anomalies like forced marriage.

“It would resist the problem of forced marriage, because Islam requires the consent of both parties,” he says. Sharia, he says, provides people with a means to “work out their own way to settle a dispute in front of an agreed third party, as long as both sides agree to the process”.

Williams was under pressure to clarify his February 7 remarks, in which he argued that certain aspects of sharia law appeared “unavoidable” in Britain. Almost two million of Britain’s 60-million population are Muslim and a 40-year policy of multiculturalism has enabled them to preserve and pursue traditions largely unfettered by the secular state.

“Certain provisions of sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system,” Williams said.

Much of the British press reported his remarks as a defence of the more extreme manifestations of sharia justice, such as beheadings and amputations. Prime Minister Brown’s spokesman said that religious law “should be subservient to British criminal and civil law”.

In some ways, Williams was merely stating the facts.

Baroness Haleh Afshar, a peer in the House of Lords and an expert in Islamic law, says there is no possibility that sharia could override British common law. She likens the system to an arbitration process that complements the law of the land. Rulings, she says, are generally binding “where they do not contravene civil law”.

“The fact is that for all religious decisions, they cannot go against the civil code and civil rights, and if either party is unhappy, then he or she can go to a civil court,” she says. “The reality is that no sharia court can allow a man to be polygamous in this country. Even if the view of the court is that men can have four wives, it cannot enforce it.”

But many Muslim women shudder at the idea of turning to Islamic scholars for rulings on their private affairs. Attempts to introduce sharia-based law to settle family disputes in Canada provoked protests from women who argued that Islamic law does not view women as equal to men.

“Women have no rights in terms of divorce,” says Amra, a Muslim woman who did not want to give her surname. “A man can divorce a woman, but it’s much harder for a woman to divorce a man.”

The problem is that there is no single form of sharia. Muslim law is not written in the Qur’an, but derived from it, and there are wide variations in the differing interpretations.

Cassandra Balchin, a Muslim convert and spokeswoman for the Muslim Women’s Network, says the interpretation being proposed in Britain is generally extremely conservative — far more so than in Muslim countries such as Morocco or Indonesia.

“They talk about the woman having to ask the man for a divorce, as if women have no autonomous rights,” Balchin says. Compare that with Pakistan, she adds, where the law recognises divorce rights and where she divorced her first husband with no trouble.

“There would be no contradiction between British law and Muslim law if we take a progressive interpretation of Islamic law,” says Balchin. The problem, she adds, is “they [laws] are so conservative as to be dumbfounding.”

— The Christian Science Monitor.

Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions. publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.