I hope not.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6190080.stm

I'm a bit concerned about it applying to criminal proceedings - this should never happen.

On the other hand, I have no real problem with civil cases being convened by these 'courts' - there is already provision in our law for this, and it is a commonly used method of arbitration. It is not really one law for one and another for another, it is a method of settling disputes - and both parties must agree before anything can happen. Then again, if it means that two custody cases would have entirely different outcomes, maybe it shouldn't be allowed.

Jewish 'Courts' have been doing this for years though

If people who coming to this country want their own religion, own food, own clothes, own people, own justice system; I don't understand why they left where they came from.

what a load of b*****ks

when in rome do as the romans do!!

I really hope this will not happen. Any one who wants to come and live here should accept our law. If they want the law of another country then they should go and live there.

Don't see a problem with this.

If people want to settle issues within their own communites, what's wrong with that?

They clearly have to so so within the laws of the land and so no one will escape british justice and neither will they be able to impose any penalties which break british laws.

"The accused men admitted their guilt and apologised. Their fathers and uncles agreed compensation."
That is taken from the article - was that the end of the matter for those 'guilty' people. Or did it go to court as well?

Don't see a problem with this.

If people want to settle issues within their own communites, what's wrong with that?

They clearly have to so so within the laws of the land and so no one will escape british justice and neither will they be able to impose any penalties which break british laws.

because it could lead to certain groups, particularly women, within these communities being disadvantaged. For example, the right of divorce under Shari'a law is strongly biased in favour of men. The following is taken from the Shari'a Council website

The right of divorce is primarily with the husband in the Shari'a. A decree of divorce issued by a civil Court will be valid if:

1.The husband is the petitioner, or:

2.The Husband consents to the divorce in writing.

If neither of the above is the case, then the wife may apply for an Islamic divorce through the Council. An application for divorce by the wife is known as Khul'a, a condition of which is that the wife returns to the husband any Maher (dower) or jewellery she received from him, if he so demands'

Within these communities, there might be pressure to use the 'courts', particularly with regard to the resolution of matrimonial disputes, which I think would be a backward step.

Thats what I was wondering - it sounds as if they agreed compensation and other more civil matters outside of a British court and then settled the criminal element within a court.

I would certainly hope thats what happened.

So this is simply arbitration with both parties agreeing to use a religious types as arbitrators, I don’t see how this can be avoided without getting rid of arbitration all together.

There’s no slippery slope from the use of religious figures as arbitrators within the law to the creation of separate codes of law I really don’t see what people are worrying about here.

what a load of b*****ks

when in rome do as the romans do!!
They are doing what us Romans do, using arbitration.

Well, if anyone is interested - by coincidence there is programme on R4 in 15 minutes 4pm? Called Law in Action and it is about this very subject. Hmmmm

this is britain or england if you want to be pedantic isnt it?

we have a system of law, it may not work correctly all the time, but in the 791 years our law system has been used its been good enough for the people of this country if someone who wishes to live in this country doesnt feel they can abide by 'the law of the land' its quite easy, live somewhere else

what a load of b*****ks

when in rome do as the romans do!!
sh#t i was going to say that

Don't see a problem with this.

If people want to settle issues within their own communites, what's wrong with that?

They clearly have to so so within the laws of the land and so no one will escape british justice and neither will they be able to impose any penalties which break british laws.

No it's bang out of order.

It can only lead to a split system of laws and more problems than it can ever solve.
While I would never tell anyone to abandon their belief system or personal morels I draw the line at having two systems of law on any level.

While it's become a daft racist rant to say "when in rome" it's still good manners if nothing else.

If Aydarus Yusuf feels more bound by the traditional law of Somalia and wants to be judged by it then he should sod off to samalia.

This is the UK. When I bugger of to other countries I respect their ideals and try to learn their point of view. People that come here should do the same.

There are two distinct elements here and they are confusing the argument.

Civil matters such as settling debts, landlord disputes, tradesman disputes are regularly settled outside the courts by all of us.
For some groups to use some senior members to arbitrate is quite common too.

Criminal matters, however are another thing entirely and should only be dealt with through our prosecution system.
This Somali example raises some serious questions as to what the police were actually aware of.

I heard the BBC broadcast this evening and they also said that other Somali groups in London did not condone this in any way at all.
I also thought that Mr Yusuf did not sound like the sharpest knife in the drawer, either.

So what happened to "the law of the land then"....as someone has already said, when in Rome etc.....

This Somali example raises some serious questions as to what the police were actually aware of.

If Mr Yusuf was correct when he said the police took no further action then it is very worrying. Or ... could they be bothered???

Good point made about civil matters being settled without police involvement though - which is what the majority of this 'second tier law' deals with I think?

Might we end up like Pakistan where you can be found not guilty by one court with the national law but guilty by the religious one.

No it's bang out of order.

It can only lead to a split system of laws and more problems than it can ever solve.
While I would never tell anyone to abandon their belief system or personal morels I draw the line at having two systems of law on any level.
So you think that arbitration as a means of resolving disputes without burdening the courts should be scrapped then?

It would solve the drug problem overnight.
With all the dealers executed they would have no where to get them.
Places like Afghanistan would be ruined.
Bodies would be piled high in certain areas of our towns and cities.

Might we end up like Pakistan where you can be found not guilty by one court with the national law but guilty by the religious one.
No at least not a court which is recognised by the state, have you actually read the article?

this is ok but what if it's a mixed race relationship ?

to be frank and to be basicly honist we'll probbly see this happening. Then the next thing that will happen they will be getting away with alsorts that us as Born in th UK will not. Murder nah....Just be blessed by the farther an your free. ect....
You get mugged by Asian ect.... which court do you take it too ? which police force do you ring as they will push for that next.

There was an Asian/British guy not a few weeks ago in jail for Murder, did he get British law passed on him ???? Big Fat NO he had to go with the LAW of that land. Same rules should Apply worldwide, your either a Guest or choose to live there/here so you take the laws of the land your in.

This is so stupid Labour will whip it in like a flash like everything else to line the own back pockets.
________
FREE PORN VIDEOS (http://www.****tube.com/)

It would solve the drug problem overnight.
With all the dealers executed they would have no where to get them.
Places like Afghanistan would be ruined.
Bodies would be piled high in certain areas of our towns and cities.
:huh: Err what?

this is ok but what if it's a mixed race relationship ?

to be frank and to be basicly honist we'll probbly see this happening. Then the next thing that will happen they will be getting away with alsorts that us as Born in th UK will not. Murder nah....Just be blessed by the farther an your free. ect....
You get mugged by Asian ect.... which court do you take it too ? which police force do you ring as they will push for that next.

There was an Asian/British guy not a few weeks ago in jail for Murder, did he get British law passed on him ???? Big Fat NO he had to go with the LAW of that land. Same rules should Apply worldwide, your either a Guest or choose to live there/here so you take the laws of the land your in.

This is so stupid Labour will whip it in like a flash like everything else to line the own back pockets.
What on earth are you talking about, did you even read the article?

:huh: Err what?


What on earth are you talking about, did you even read the article?
When naivity was being handed out, you were at the top of the queue weren't you? :(

I think its a great idea! More of us should roll over and allow ourselves to be ****** on by people of all nations who want to turn us into a copy of the countries they ran away from.

let them do what they want they will anyway this is just the thin end of the wedge

So you think that arbitration as a means of resolving disputes without burdening the courts should be scrapped then?

It depends on the form and the nature of the arbitration. If for example the values which underpin it are at odds in some crucial respects with prevailing cultural norms, values and legal principles, then it does raise serious issues. For example, women in this country have fought for decades to obtain fair play, equality and justice in matrimonial disputes, not least in relation to divorce settlements. Whatever else it does, Shari'a law does not treat men and women as equals in such disputes. It would therefore be a backward step for the principle of equal rights in the UK.

I knew it! It only took a few posts for this to descend into mudslinging!

So you think that arbitration as a means of resolving disputes without burdening the courts should be scrapped then?

Didn't say that. I have to agree that sorting things out without needing to go to the courts is a good thing but this man is saying he likes another country's law over ours.

If that is the case he should bugger off back there and not try to change us.
It's not a matter of race but it is a matter of good manners.

As it happens there are elements in other country's laws and in islamic law that I would like to see here but I feel I have the right to criticize my own country but I do not have the right to go abroad and criticize others.

I say again, it's bad manners.

When naivity was being handed out, you were at the top of the queue weren't you? :(

Please don't be abusive - please debate the issues in a civil manner.

Please don't be abusive - please debate the issues in a civil manner.
OK, but I was going easy on him there. :hihi:

Please don't be abusive - please debate the issues in a civil manner.

JoeP, artisan, heaven help me, has become an SF friend! Don't ask me how, but he got me in the Hipperholme Whippet and Pigeon Fancier's Club Christmas Draw!

:hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

ok what about this then.

There are as many faiths as stars in the sky, how would anyone police them all.

If you want to do it by country , 193 countries in the world . Thats alot of law to also police.

Thing will for sure get mixed up.

Then there's the offender. If a faith carries death penilty for murder he'll just change faiths and get a Jail or somthing lesser.

:huh:
________
Ford Thames 300E Picture (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Thames_300E)

JoeP, artisan, heaven help me, has become an SF friend! Don't ask me how, but he got me in the Hipperholme Whippet and Pigeon Fancier's Club Christmas Draw!

:hihi: :hihi: :hihi:
Its been ripped off by the chairman, took a leaf out of farepacks book and he has retired to the Bahamas. hboss has the rest. :hihi:

it is an interesting topic - the idea of " the end of one law for all in the Uk".

perhaps we should take a leaf out from Mordor. In that society it is "one ring to rule them all". Perhaps creating an all powerful ring that will harness all the magic power of the planet should be created.

If people who coming to this country want their own religion, own food, own clothes, own people, own justice system; I don't understand why they left where they came from.

Good point, put free in front of the following, housing, medical care, schooling, clothing, food, need I go on?

And when you have all that give the host country the finger and tell them to shove their Justice system as you will do it your way thankyou very much.

If people who coming to this country want their own religion, own food, own clothes, own people, own justice system; I don't understand why they left where they came from.

Quite, it does make you wonder really. I always thought they came here to get away from repression and religious oppression etc. Instead they seem to be wanting to make this country into a carbon copy of the ones their grand/parents fled from.

This is really quite scary, especially for women and minority groups. It's the thin end of the wedge imo. But I suppose we'll just lie down and roll over like we always do. By the time we wake up to what's happening, it'll be too late.

In no way can anyone compare what goes on in the Jewish community to Islam. For a start the Jewish religious community in UK is less than half a million and falling AFAIK, the Muslims are over one and half million and increasing all the time with births and continuing immigration.

Not many Muslims want this imposed on them anyway. So it'd be a lot simpler if the people that want to live as though they're in the countries of their ancestors just went there to live. Why don't they?

JoeP, artisan, heaven help me, has become an SF friend! Don't ask me how, but he got me in the Hipperholme Whippet and Pigeon Fancier's Club Christmas Draw!

:hihi: :hihi: :hihi:

Soeshine dearest................I have bad news for you. The winning ticket gets a prize bitch/bird............I'll let you work it out............(he talked me into it, honest! ) :hihi:

According to the article in question:

The court cannot force anyone to come within its jurisdiction. But once someone agrees to settle a dispute in the Beth Din, he or she is bound in English law to abide by the court's decision.

This is because under English law people may devise their own way to settle a dispute before an agreed third party.

So it looks like they are working within UK law?

According to the article in question:



So it looks like they are working within UK law?

But this is to discount the importance of cultural and moral pressures which, for example, could play a significant role in matrimonial disputes.

An interesting programme on this very subject, broadcast earlier today if anyone is interested......http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/law_in_action/6191416.stm

But this is to discount the importance of cultural and moral pressures which, for example, could play a significant role in matrimonial disputes.

However it's hardly a new occurance is it and there haven't been any significant effects from it so far?

However it's hardly a new occurance is it and there haven't been any significant effects from it so far?

Because it is still very much at the embryonic stage. However, wherever Shari'a law has been developed as a significant alternative to the existing national law, there has been trouble and it has resulted in disputes over competing jurisdictions.

No at least not a court which is recognised by the state, have you actually read the article?

Yes I read the article. One example given was that a Somali stabbed another Somali. Under our existing law that is a criminal offence and so the culprit should be punished under that law.
What he is pushing for is that it is OK to stab some one providing you are prepared to pay them and their families compensation.
If I stab a Yorkshireman if his law comes in then I can pay the compensation, but if I stab a Lancastrian I will be punished under the law of the land.

You will say i have posted a load of C... So is that idiots idea.

It depends on the form and the nature of the arbitration. If for example the values which underpin it are at odds in some crucial respects with prevailing cultural norms, values and legal principles, then it does raise serious issues. For example, women in this country have fought for decades to obtain fair play, equality and justice in matrimonial disputes, not least in relation to divorce settlements. Whatever else it does, Shari'a law does not treat men and women as equals in such disputes. It would therefore be a backward step for the principle of equal rights in the UK.
Jewish law (which is obviously a big influence on Islam) isn’t exactly equal in its treatment of the sexes either & that has apparently been used to resolve disputes for quite a while. Personally I loathe the idea of religious law but I don’t see how you can prevent people agreeing to abide by it if you allow arbitration.

Didn't say that.
Maybe you didn’t mean that but when you said ‘I draw the line at having two systems of law on any level’ it certainly sounded like you wanted to get rid of arbitration which inevitably allows people to resolve disputes using systems other than British law.

I have to agree that sorting things out without needing to go to the courts is a good thing but this man is saying he likes another country's law over ours.

If that is the case he should bugger off back there and not try to change us.
It's not a matter of race but it is a matter of good manners.

As it happens there are elements in other country's laws and in islamic law that I would like to see here but I feel I have the right to criticize my own country but I do not have the right to go abroad and criticize others.

I say again, it's bad manners.
Anyone who thinks their ‘cultural’ law should take precedence over British law in the UK is not only rude but stupid and I’m glad to say bound to be disappointed as if there’s one thing the British courts really won’t stand for it’s people refusing to accept their authority.

Yes I read the article. One example given was that a Somali stabbed another Somali. Under our existing law that is a criminal offence and so the culprit should be punished under that law.
And he stands at considerable risk of that happening as the police responding to the program said that they were still investigating the case and that the Somali ‘courts’ decision wouldn’t stop them from doing so.

What he is pushing for is that it is OK to stab some one providing you are prepared to pay them and their families compensation.
If I stab a Yorkshireman if his law comes in then I can pay the compensation, but if I stab a Lancastrian I will be punished under the law of the land.

You will say i have posted a load of C... So is that idiots idea.
Yes the idiot’s idea is a load of crap and like your prediction of religious courts overruling civil ones in the UK extraordinarily unlikely to become reality.

At the risk of being pedantic, may I point out that the thread title refers to the United Kingdom where we do, in fact, have more than one legal system.
There are significant differences in many areas of Scots Law, both Civil and Criminal, when compared to English Law.

And he stands at considerable risk of that happening as the police responding to the program said that they were still investigating the case and that the Somali ‘courts’ decision wouldn’t stop them from doing so.


Yes the idiot’s idea is a load of crap and like your prediction of religious courts overruling civil ones in the UK extraordinarily unlikely to become reality.

I would never have thought forty years ago that there would be a Gay &lesbian section of trade unions, a black police federation, mosques springing up like mushrooms. Things happen in the future that we would never dream of today.
Today's' idea is tomorrow's revolution

I would never have thought forty years ago that there would be a Gay &lesbian section of trade unions, a black police federation, mosques springing up like mushrooms. Things happen in the future that we would never dream of today.
Today's' idea is tomorrow's revolution

And things happen today that you would hardly dream of tomorrow...

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article2023831.ece

The Islamic perception of 'justice' should be a concern for us all.

Jewish law (which is obviously a big influence on Islam) isn’t exactly equal in its treatment of the sexes either & that has apparently been used to resolve disputes for quite a while. Personally I loathe the idea of religious law but I don’t see how you can prevent people agreeing to abide by it if you allow arbitration.

Well, it was done in Ontario, where an attempt was made to establish Shari'a 'courts' to deal with matrimonial cases. Interestingly, much of the opposition to this came from muslim women, as well as from secular feminist groups, who argued that such courts would be profoundly discriminatory against women (its no wonder that Sharia matrimonial courts are favoured by some men, because they free them from the obligation to pay alimony). As for such courts (or 'arbitration tribunals') being 'voluntary, as I said in a previous post, within certain communities there are likely to be strong cultural and moral pressures to use them.

As for the point about Jewish law, it should be remembered that the Jewish community in the UK is not only shrinking in numbers but is also increasingly secularised. So although the remit of the Beth Din still runs, its actual role in matrimonial matters is probably declining. Conversely, not only is the muslim comunity growing in size, at least parts of it are becoming increasingly bound by the tenets of their faith. An additional system of religious law which is highly discriminatory against women is not something to be accepted without all kinds of safeguards, if indeed it should be allowed at all.

Moreover, if you read the statements of those advocating Shari'a in the UK it is clear that they do not wish this to be confined only to matrimonial cases, but would like to see it extended also to many other matters. In other words, they would like to see two systems of law operating in the UK.

I can see alot of the lawyers complaining about this. I'm sure it will hit their growth forecasts.

I can see alot of the lawyers complaining about this. I'm sure it will hit their growth forecasts.

They will probably make lots of money out of the demarcation disputes which would inevitably arise out of the competing jurisdictions, just as they would out of the bid to establish Shari'a courts in the UK in the first place (this was the case in Ontario, for example). :thumbsup:

Muslim law reaches Britain
30/11/06
SECRET courts imposing draconian Islamic justice are operating across Britain.

Last night politicians and religious leaders expressed outrage that sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in our society.

The hardline Islamic law allows people to be stoned to death, beheaded or have their limbs amputated.
full story here
http://www.express.co.uk/news_detail.html?sku=793

Umm...

1) Discussed yesterday in detail, original topic was posted by LordC.

and

2) Are you suggesting that these secret courts are beheading and amputating people?

I'm very happy craig, death to the infidels and all that jazz

Judging by sentiments expressed elsewhere on the forum, chopping off the hands of thieving scum and public executions would receive a warm reception from a fair few....

Why would the lefties be happy?! Surely, the 'lefties' as you call them would be up in arms at such violations of basic human rights etc....

surely leftys would be very unhappy of any foreign law coming here:huh:

Erm, if they are secret and operating outisde UK law, then how can it be the fault of the left? It's like saying "Dog poo in the streets! Hope you lefties are happy now".

Buffoonery. :rolleyes:

if the laws came into force i would be definatly looking for all the loop holes :hihi:

law in this country should be fair, but it also should be SEEN to be fair how can a secret 'court' be seen to be fair how can any secret 'court' convict a person on evidence that could have been coersed or beaten out of a suspect will the islamaphiles say that when a woman is stoned or someone has a hand cut off for stealing its not our buisness and we should stay out of muslim affairs

british law should prevail in britain if anyone wants to live under sharia law or any other law than the law of THIS land they should move to a country that has a system of law that they believe in

This is not a leftie issue.... :rolleyes:

The only actual case referred to (as opposed to made-up, craigmason)
sounds entirely reasonable - bad lads admit their guilt, apologise and pay compensation to their victim. Nice!

No. They escaped criminal justice. There are laws in our land for a reason, just because the victims family say its ok to bypass the criminal justice system and settle out of court doesn't make it right. Anything could have happened, for example the victims family may have been threatened. Then does it still sound entirely reasonable?

Mod note: Threads merged.