Posted: Jul 15, 2015 2:22 pm
by Sendraks
Peter Brown wrote:well that is also supporting my point, Sharia isn't a great system to live under.


That's hardly your point Peter. No one here thinks that Sharia is a great system.

Peter Brown wrote:but it doesn't stop that being demanded for in non Muslim nations does it?

People demand all sorts of stupid things.
A group of rich entitled toffs recently made demands about fox hunting.

Peter Brown wrote: This group wasn't set up because every Muslim in the UK loves British laws. It was set up because a large number of Muslims demanded that to them Sharia trumped British law and the funding that they got from abroad funded political change so Sharia courts were allowed. They have now a non binding comprimise, the fear is the demands for Sharia will end up as legally binding in the UK nd screw all the people who left that sort of imprisonment.


A large number of Muslims?
How large Peter?

Sharia courts are allowed in the UK, but they do not function as a legal authority in the way a UK court does. They are, recognised under the 1996 arbitration act, as a form of arbitration service for Muslims. Individuals involved in cases, must agree to abide by the sharia law rulings. If an individual does not, then they default to their rights and protections under UK.

Sharia courts have no ability to override UK law. None. Anyone who says otherwise is either lying or deeply misunderstood.

All this said, Sharia courts are still deeply wrong, outmoded institutions. They do not operate to the same standard as civil rights as UK courts and are typically tool of perpetuating ongoing discrimination and persecution of women and children. No one can be forced to go before a Sharia court and while this does happen, it is a crime and violation of civil rights under UK law. That such things occur, is abhorrent and UK law can and does become involved.

The best and most effective way for these courts to disappear is for people to stop using them, even for benign arbitration purposes.