Author: Clare Dwyer Hogg and Jonathan Wynne-Jones
Publication: The Telegraph
Date: January 19, 2008
URL:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=QLNZVICTZVU23QFIQMGCFGGAVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/20/nsharia_120.xml&page=1
Islamic courts meet every week in the UK to
rule on divorces and financial disputes. Clare Dwyer Hogg and Jonathan Wynne-Jones
report on demands by senior Muslims that sharia be given legal authority
Amnah is a modern British Muslim. She is dressed
in a denim skirt and her head is covered in a hijab. Poised and self-assured,
she has come to meet Dr Suhaib Hasan, a silver-bearded sheikh who sits behind
his desk, surrounded by religious books.
"But why would I have to observe the waiting
period?" she asks him. "What are the reasons?" There is an urgency
to her questions.
"These reasons don't apply to me, that's
what I'm very confused about. If you could give me the reasons why I have to
wait three months, then I'll understand."
Amnah is going through a divorce and is baffled
at being told that she must wait for three months to remarry, considering that
she hasn't seen her estranged husband for two years.
She twists her sock-clad toes into the carpet,
grasping one hand with the other in her lap, and fixes Dr Hasan with an intense
look. He meets this with a simple reply: "These rulings are all in the
Koran. The rulings are made for all."
Amnah has little choice but to comply: Dr Hasan
is a judge, and this is a sharia court - in east London. It sits, innocuously,
at the end of a row of terrace houses in Leyton: a converted corner shop, with
blinds on the windows, office- style partitions and a makeshift reception area.
It is one of dozens of sharia courts - also
known as councils - that have been set up in mosques, Islamic centres and even
schools across Britain. The number of British Muslims using the courts is increasing.
To many in the West, talk of sharia law conjures
up images of the floggings, stonings, amputations and beheadings carried out
in hardline Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran. However, the form
practised in Britain is more mundane, focusing mainly on marriage, divorce and
financial disputes.
The judgments of the courts have no basis in
British law, and are therefore technically illegitimate - they are binding only
in that those involved agree to comply. For British Muslims who are keen to
follow Islam, this poses a dilemma. An Islamic marriage is not recognised by
British law, and therefore many couples will have two ceremonies - civil for
the state, and Islamic for their faith.
If they wish to divorce, they must then seek
both a civil and an Islamic divorce.
Dr Hasan, who has been presiding over sharia
courts in Britain for more than 25 years, argues that British law would benefit
from integrating aspects of Islamic personal law into the civil system, so that
divorces could be rubber-stamped in the same way, for example, that Jewish couples
who go to the Beth Din court have their divorce recognised in secular courts.
He points out that the Islamic Sharia Council,
of which he is the general secretary, is flooded with work. It hears about 50
divorce cases every month, and responds to as many as 10 requests every day
by email and phone for a fatwa - a religious verdict on a religious matter.
Dr Hasan, who is also a spokesman for the Muslim
Council of Britain on issues of sharia law, says there is great misunderstanding
of the issue in the West.
"Whenever people associate the word 'sharia'
with Muslims, they think it is flogging and stoning to death and cutting off
the hand," he says with a smile.
He makes the distinction between the aspects
of law that sharia covers: worship, penal law, and personal law. Muslim leaders
in Britain are interested only in integrating personal law, he says.
"Penal law is the duty of the Muslim state
- it is not in the hands of any public institution like us to handle it. Only
a Muslim government that believes in Islam is going to implement it. So there
is no question of asking for penal law to be introduced here in the UK - that
is out of the question."
Despite this, Dr Hasan is open in supporting
the severe punishments meted out in countries where sharia law governs the country.
"Even though cutting off the hands and
feet, or flogging the drunkard and fornicator, seem to be very abhorrent, once
they are implemented, they become a deterrent for the whole society.
"This is why in Saudi Arabia, for example,
where these measures are implemented, the crime rate is very, very, low,"
he told The Sunday Telegraph.
In a documentary to be screened on Channel 4
next month, entitled Divorce: Sharia Style, Dr Hasan goes further, advocating
a sharia system for Britain. "If sharia law is implemented, then you can
turn this country into a haven of peace because once a thief's hand is cut off
nobody is going to steal," he says.
"Once, just only once, if an adulterer
is stoned nobody is going to commit this crime at all.
"We want to offer it to the British society.
If they accept it, it is for their good and if they don't accept it they'll
need more and more prisons."
These sentiments, and the vast cultural gulf
they expose, alarm many in the West and go to the heart of the debate about
the level of integration among Muslims living in Britain and their acceptance
of British values.
Dr Hasan's cause is not helped by the fact that,
last December, he was named by the Policy Exchange think tank as being linked
to a mosque, the Al-Tawhid in Leyton, east London, which was accused of propagating
extremist literature - although the evidence for this has since been challenged.
Many are uncomfortable with the idea of linking
sharia to civil law in Britain. In The Sunday Telegraph earlier this month,
Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester, wrote: "Attempts have been
made to impose an "Islamic" character on certain areas?. There is
pressure already to relate aspects of the sharia to civil law in Britain. To
some extent this is already true of arrangements for sharia-compliant banking
but have the far-reaching implications of this been fully considered?"
There are also issues around the Islamic approach
to equality and human rights that make integration with British law problematic
and contentious.
Sharia judges in this country deal mainly with
divorce - khula. In Islamic law, a husband can divorce his wife in the presence
of two witnesses without having to go through an official system.
He can even merely utter the word "talaq"
- meaning "to release" - to gain a divorce, whether or not the wife
accepts it. She has no such right and must go through the processes of sharia,
entreating judges to grant her divorce.
"The introduction of sharia law in Britain
raises complex questions, as some of its basic tenets are incompatible with
the fundamental principles of our liberal democracy and the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights," says Baroness Cox, a leading human rights campaigner.
"There is no equality before the law between
men and women and between Muslims and non-Muslims; and there is no freedom to
choose and change religion."
Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the Muslim Council
of Britain's inter-faith committee, admits that to non-Muslims some laws may
seem harsh on women. Those who are married to a man with a number of wives can
be treated badly, for instance. But he insists that sharia is an equitable system.
"It may mean that a woman married under
Islamic law has no legal rights, but the husband is required to pay for everything
in marriage and in the case of a divorce all the woman's belongings are hers
to keep."
In fact, Sheikh Mogra argues that sharia in
Britain would give rights to women. "A Muslim man can take a second wife
under sharia law and treat her as he wants, knowing that she has no legal rights
in Britain. It means that she is regarded as no more than a mistress and he
can walk out on her when he wants."
Critics warn, however, that in giving even parts
of sharia law official status, Britain would be associating itself with a system
that in many ways was intolerable according to Western values.
Professor John Marks, author of The West, Islam
and Islamism, points out that apostates from Islam can suffer severe punishment,
even honour killings.
"There are more violent cases that are
being related to people who choose to convert from Islam," he says.
A survey by Policy Exchange found that 36 per
cent of young British Muslims believed that a Muslim who converted to another
religion should be "punished by death".
"This clearly goes against the laws of
our country. If they come to live in this country they should live by our laws,"
says Prof Marks.
Haras Rafiq, the executive director of the Sufi
Muslim Council, points out that Muslims are anyway divided on the correct interpretation
of sharia law. He is particularly critical of those who support the strict penal
law.
"Things like stoning are being used as
a deterrent, but this is reinterpreting the Koran in a rigid and extreme way
that misses the spirit of what is being said."
Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of
some form of recognition of sharia in Britain is that it would help to regulate
a system that operates beyond the law.
The Government has expressed concern about imams
who may be using the Koran to justify fatwas that clash with British law.
Leaders of four major British Muslim groups
published a government-backed report in 2006 that accepted that many imams were
not qualified to give guidance to alienated young people.
They agreed to set up a watchdog aimed at tackling
extremism and monitoring mosques, but Yunes Teinaz, a former adviser to the
London Central Mosque, warns that one of the greatest problems is the imams
who arrive in Britain unable to speak English, and with no regard for British
law.
"The absence of anyone regulating the mosques
and sharia courts means that they can act as a law unto themselves, issuing
fatwas that breach people's human rights because they have no knowledge of the
law," he says. "They can take people's money despite having no proper
qualifications, but worse they can harm the communities that they are in."
Zareen Roohi Ahmed, the chief executive of the
British Muslim Forum - one of the four groups on the Mosques and Imams National
Advisory Body - concedes that sharia courts in Britain are still poorly organised.
"They need development - the government
should be supporting them to deliver their service more effectively," she
says.
"If sharia courts can be supported to be
more professionally run and to have female involvement as well on the decision-making
panels, then I think they can work quite effectively and meet the needs of Muslims."
She suggests that existing systems need to be
supported and a wider range of scholars and academics involved to put more thought
into making the rules and regulations applicable to today's society.
Dr Muhammad Abdul Bari, the secretary general
of the Muslim Council of Britain, points out that during British rule in India,
Muslim personal law was allowed to operate and sees no reason why it wouldn't
work now.
"Sharia encompasses all aspects of Muslim
life including personal law," he says. "In tolerant, inclusive societies
all faith groups enjoy some acceptance of their religious rules in matters of
their personal life.
"I am sure some day our society here will
also be more at ease with its Muslim community and see the benefit of allowing
such rights to those who prefer this."
Back in the court in Leyton, the plight of Amnah
is typical of the challenges facing Muslim women in Britain who are seeking
to abide by the traditional Islamic teaching, but find themselves victims of
the system as a result.
The husband she seeks to divorce is untraceable,
but she married him in a purely Islamic ceremony so now she must fight to gain
her freedom.
She met him on an Islamic matrimonial website,
then discovered that he wasn't everything he had claimed to be.
"I found out he was stealing money from
me," she says, adding that her husband had lied about having a job and
a visa for the UK.
"So how come you married such a person
who is not of your standard?" Dr Hasan asks quietly, leafing through the
notes of her case.
"I made a mistake," Amnah says, simply.
"Basically this man lied to me from the beginning until the end. Not only
did he fool me, he fooled my
family."
Despite Amnah's protestations and questioning,
Dr Hasan goes on to explain that the methods and rules set out in the Koran
are for very practical reasons.
A recently divorced wife must wait three months
to remarry to give enough time for her ex-husband to know that she is not carrying
his child. "This is for all," he says.
"There is no exception to this rule, in
the sharia there is no exception, you have to accept it."
He takes down a copy of the Koran from a shelf
and points to the chapter and verse that spells out the lengths of iddat - the
waiting period - in detailed terms.
There are different lengths for widows, for
wives whose husbands have authorised the divorce and for wives whose husbands
have not. There is even a rule for pre-pubescent girls.
For Amnah, it is clear that the answer has thrown
up further problems for her. "Another quick question," she says. "Because
I'm going through a divorce now, is it right for me to have found someone or
should I have waited?"
The man may not, Dr Hasan replies, clearly state
his wish to marry her - he may subtly make his intentions known, as in "once
you are free from marriage, remember me", but no, not propose. That is
not allowed in the Koran.
Amnah thanks him with deference, and leaves.
Coming through this religious court is the only way she will be truly at liberty
to remarry but, for now, she must wait.