Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Sharia not to be feared

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 10 October 2008
One of the indicators of a society's wellbeing is its ability to celebrate difference and learn from other people. Another is how justice is administered and disputes are resolved. The advent of sharia courts in Scotland should herald a time of reflection and interest, not fear and outrage (your report, 9 October). What sharia courts bring to our society is another method of dispute resolution. It is a particular group choosing to avoid the expense and time of using the court system
What is being brought to us is not some kind of parallel jurisdiction that replaces our legal system; rather it is a space, within a given community, for disputes to be resolved.

That being said, the method and outcome of the sharia court's deliberations must meet three crucial standards. Its rulings must not preclude recourse to the courts for the parties involved. The decisions must not break the fundamental tenets of the Human Rights Act upon which our legal system is now based. In that regard, the rights of women in particular must be respected.

We would apply these standards to any method of dispute resolution, including to changes in our own laws and legal system and so it is for consistency that we would expect the same of sharia courts or any other dispute resolution system. From that common ground there is much to learn about the journey to peace among families, neighbours and communities.

(REV) IAN GALLOWAY

Convener, Church of Scotland Church and Society Council

George Street

Edinburgh



The full article contains 257 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 09 October 2008 8:31 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Team Scotland,

10/10/2008 00:20:40

This facility is currently extended to Jews so why not to Muslims? As long as both parties in a dispute agree I see no objection to either.






2

Wallace1297,

10/10/2008 00:23:57
It is ok for you Rev because you live in a politically correct multi-cultural bubble. You are not a woman or a Muslim so these patriarchal medieval courts will have no impact on your life. So you can afford to be upright and didactic about this subject.

I don’t think you will lose any credibility for embracing Saudi Arabian style theocratic law because I don’t think you ever had any in the first place.

Your views are suggestive of a wider melancholy within society. Whenever there is a clash between the indigenous culture and the Islamic one in this country, the indigenous culture is always presumed to be wrong. People like you are always queuing up to tell us how we must bend over backwards so as not to offend the religious sensibilities of Muslims.

The reason I and many others want to aspect of Sharia law in this country as it is a materialization of clerical fascism which favours men over women
3

Ed_Izmir,

Turkey 10/10/2008 02:07:55
Hard to believe that Rev Galloway can be so naive.
4

Guga II,

Rockall 10/10/2008 03:22:42
If these people want to be ruled by Sharia law, then I strongly suggest that they move to a country that operates under that system.

Scottish law does, and should continue to, apply to everyone living in Scotland. There is no room for differing legal systems based on particular religions.

Taken to its logical and farcical conclusion, if a group of people living in Scotland are immigrants from Haiti, does that mean they have the right to set up a legal system based on voodoo beliefs?

If the SNP, or any political party, condones such extra-territorial legal jurisdiction for immigrants living in Scotland, they will end up alienating the Scottish people.

The old adage about when you live in Rome, do as the Romans do, applies to the legal system. If I live in Saudi Arabia, I have no alternative but to accept their legal system. They will not make any allowances for me being a foreigner in their country; nor should they. The same should apply for any foreigners, or foreign immigrants living in Scotland. They should accept that they have to comply with Scottish law. If they don't like it, no-one is stopping them from leaving.

Incidentally, why have the Hootsmon not sought the views of the Free Church of Scotland, or the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland? They might have quite different views to that expressed by the failing and unrepresentative Church of Scotland.
5

Colin Wilson,

10/10/2008 06:27:59
If some people agree, voluntarily, to be bound by the judgements of religious tribunals then that's entirely up to them. However, it should be out of the question for these to have any standing in the eyes of the law.

As far as the law is concerned, there should be one law for everyone, and there should be no place in it for religion.
6

Mikey,

10/10/2008 07:13:59
#5, I couldn't have put it better myself.
7

Unimpressed one,

10/10/2008 07:32:29
#4, Guga - excellent posting.
8

StuartAD,

WestLothian 10/10/2008 08:27:34
The views posted by (Rev) Ian Galloway might be his own, my question is are they the views of the Church of Scotland?
If they are why have we never heard of them before? If they are not why write in using this George Street, is it at "121" he is residing? Perhaps he is trying to impress us with his title!
9

Boy Wonder,

10/10/2008 08:29:38
Scots law has done its job, albeit imperfectly, for a long time. Why bring in in a different system for a people who have come to our country from elsewhere? Is this what thy came here for? Not to be subject to our laws but imported ones?

No, if anyone wants come here, be part of our community and be part of us .. then they must adopt our ways and be welcome. After all, we have to do it in their countries ... which most of them have fled from!!

Drop this idea now ... cos if it isn't ... it will come back and bite those in favour of it on the bum!
10

Urban Guerrilla,

Edinburgh 10/10/2008 09:07:57
Mr Galloway must have taken leave of his senses. The introduction of Sharia courts into Scotland must be opposed at all costs. The Law of Scotland must be the same for all, irrespective of religion or anything else.
11

Curious Yellow,

Edinburgh 10/10/2008 09:46:14
I think the overwhelming message here is that this is an absolute NO NO. Anyone who thinks it would be a good idea to permit alternative 'legal' resolutions must be off their trolley.
12

GlenB,

10/10/2008 11:05:45
Perhaps the rev should read this

http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=news&lang=en&length=long&idelement=5599&backpage=summaries&critere=&countryname=&rowcur=

To quote the rev
"From that common ground there is much to learn about the journey to peace among families, neighbours and communities."
13

Green,

Dundee 10/10/2008 11:24:16
The difficulty with these comments is that while alternate dispute resolution and mediation are available in the UK, a BBC report of its own research in 2007, said that they found widespread ignorance amogst Muslim women of their rights as inhabitants of the Uk to go to the UK courts. There were concerns that women were being forced into these sharia courts by ignorance. It should not be forgotten that these self-styled 'courts' (they have no legal standing in reality) are charging a lot of money for what they do, . It is an important question, why are women in the UK ignorant of their legal rights? Who is misinforming or failing to inform them? Surely not the Muslim leaders and imans and teaching in the 'faith' schools?
14

GlenB,

10/10/2008 11:33:03
#13 "(they have no legal standing in reality)"

By seeking recognition as Arbitration Tribunals they can then come under the law regarding arbitration (in England at least at present) and in that way the decisions of these "tribunals" can be enforced through the UK courts.

By agreeing to arbitration the complainant gives up any further recourse to the law unless criminal action can be shown.
15

Venachar,

10/10/2008 11:53:57
Reverend Galloway you may well have a degree in theology or whatever but you are a fool none the less!

Please go to Saudi Arabia to convert some natives. I am sure you will very quickly learn about the "journey to peace among families, neighbour and communities", yeh strait to jail if you are lucky.
16

Green,

Dundee 10/10/2008 11:57:44
GlanB
Nonsense. You try to get a British court to treat divorce as arbitration. Its largely used in categories of commercial disputes, where the courts will consider making binding a decision on a dispute made using arbitration using expert arbitrators.

Most unsuitable are cases which involve the resolution of legal status, such as marriage/divorce and those areas where there is frequently an imbalance of power between parties, such as consumer/company disputes.

Mediation is used in this country where parties to a marriage agree, but even there the mediators must refuse under their professional rules to take part where there is clearly an imbalance of power or knowledge between the parties, or where the parties are involved in a philosophical or religious belief system which involves women treating themselves as inferior to men.

This is why the UK government was never able to make mediation compulsory for disputes about children or money on divorce, something a few years ago it was very keen to do. The question of actually making the resolution of the divorce itself, subject to mediation has never arisen.

You may go to any religious body you like and ask them to divorce you or annul your marriage by their rules. It means nothing, only the UK courts can grant a divorce valid in UK law.

Finally its rather ironic, as all the major religions had to be driven into accepting divorce at all, and some still do not.
17

Itchy,

10/10/2008 12:06:30
"One of the indicators of a society's wellbeing is its ability to celebrate difference and learn from other people."

Sharia Law does not do either of these things
18

GlenB,

10/10/2008 12:15:29
#16

I didn't say it covered every situation merely pointed out that under areas where arbitration law applies a Sharia court would have a legal status.

So it wasn't nonsense.
19

Green,

Dundee 10/10/2008 12:35:53
Not likely. But it is good to see people beginning to understamd the differences between arbitration, alternative dispute resolution, the activities of religious organisations, mediation and the legal institutions of the UK.

The term court has been very widely claimed by these religious organisations and it is highly misleading to the general public, and the average journalist.

Arbitration is only recognised where the parties freely agree to it, where the arbitration can be seen to act with fairness and impartiality, and adopts procedures suitable to the circumstances of the case, likely to lead to fairness in the outcome. There are differences between Scottish law on arbitration and the law of England and Wales, but those general rules always apply. Arbitration can only be used and will only be recognised by the courts of the UK in very limited circumstances.
20

Billious43,

Glasgow 10/10/2008 13:16:06
Tosh - one law for all.
21

Eric D,

Alba 10/10/2008 13:33:22
There’s an old Arab proverb that states: "Once the camel’s head is inside the tent, the whole body is certain to follow."
22

Man On Corstorphine Omnibus,

10/10/2008 14:53:32
More politically-correct claptrap from our oh so trendy "national church".
The fact is that many people in the "Muslim community", particularly women without or with little English, will take the view that Sharia law is the proper and only course open to them. They are unlikely ever to go to "mainstream" law.
If Sharia law becomes accepted it will be a huge step forward in the cultural/racial balkanisation of Britain, brought upon us by politicians of both major parties through a mixture of negligence, wishful thinking and downright stupidity.
To think that less than 50 years ago we were a settled, homogeneous community when things like Sharia law, Muslim isolation and racial tensions were simply not issues.
As the late, great Enoch once said: "It's like watching a once-great country building its own funeral pyre."
23

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 10/10/2008 21:31:19
Our justice system is based on equality before the law: justice must be blind to those before it (hence the symbolism of the blindfolded lady on the Old Bailey). Sharia does not treat those before it with that equality, so whether or not it replaces any existing British justice, it cannot be tolerated.

Also, many brought before a Sharia court (regardless of the 'offence') will not be aware of their full rights and may not even know they might have another choice.

Say no to Sharia in any form.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.