Sharia in the UK: Sharia divorces could be allowed under British law after legal ruling

This article is almost completely unhelpful in explaining exactly what Sharia divorce is. It does say that “men have the right of unilateral divorce under classical Sharia” and that a Sunni Muslim divorce is effective when the man tells his wife that he is divorcing her,” but otherwise the only information it provides is this: “A marriage can be terminated by the husband in the talaq process, or by the wife seeking divorce through khul’.”

That’s just nomenclature. The Telegraph doesn’t explain that while talaq is unilateral and all a man has to do is tell his wife that she is divorced, khul is much more complicated. The woman initiates the process but must obtain her husband’s consent for the divorce, return the dowry, and go through a waiting period before marrying again. So essentially she has no rights if her husband does not agree to the divorce, and can emerge from the process penniless after she has provided compensation to her husband.

If a Muslim man is unhappy with any of his wives, however, he is free to divorce them simply by saying the triple talaq — “I divorce you” or “you are divorced.” Recent fatwas from Islamic authorities have allowed for this pronouncement of divorce to be made via cellphone or Skype. Since men can obtain divorces so easily, they often divorce capriciously.

In Islamic law, if a man says talaq to his wife three times, even jokingly or in a fit of temper, they must separate, and cannot reconcile until she marries another man, consummates that marriage, and is divorced by him. This bizarre law is based on the Qur’an: “A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness….So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), he cannot, after that, re-marry her until after she has married another husband and he has divorced her” (2:229-230).

This has given rise to the phenomenon of “temporary husbands.” After a husband has divorced his wife in a fit of pique, these men who will “marry” the hapless divorcee for one night in order to allow her to return to her husband and family.

Is Britain going to legalize all of this?

“Sharia divorces could be allowed after legal ruling,” by Richard Alleyne in the Telegraph, February 1:

Divorces settled by religious courts including Sharia are a step closer to being allowed under British law after a landmark legal decision.

The prospect came after a couple had their divorce settlement under Beth Din, or Jewish law, referred to by the High Court.

According to the Times, it is the first time in British legal history where an English family judge has agreed to refer a divorce dispute to a religious court.

Experts said that the judgment could have far-reaching consequences and clear the way for other couples to seek a divorce in a religious court, including Sharia.

The decision was welcomed by the Muslim Council of Britain.

A spokesman told the Times: “If it leads to the eventual acceptance of Sharia court divorces, then Muslims will be very encouraged.”

Lawyers said it was significant that Mr Justice Baker cited the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and his talk on Sharia in 2008 in his ruling.

During the lecture, Dr Williams said that “citizenship in a secular society should not necessitate the abandoning of religious discipline”.

The latest case involved a couple of observant orthodox Jews in their 20s….

The Muslim laws governing divorce vary substantially between states and cultures. Men have the right of unilateral divorce under classical Sharia.

A marriage can be terminated by the husband in the talaq process, or by the wife seeking divorce through khul’.

A Sunni Muslim divorce is effective when the man tells his wife that he is divorcing her.

UK: Woman scarred for life when niqab-wearing attacker throws acid in her face
BBC cuts lines from honor killing drama in order to avoid offending Muslims
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    There should be no parallel legal system. Sharia law should not be allowed. A non-Muslim man wanting a quick divorce from his wife could simply convert to Islam in order to do so. This is what Muslims want of course, more converts!

  2. says

    Behold! Sharia Love Fest in the Land of the Two Holy Places!

    Is Sharia law superior to British law? Muslims think so. And they are determined to live by it. And when push comes to shove they will demand it, or else.

    We ex-Muslims living with Islam’s formal and informal death penalty for apostasy know that the cruel cult of Mohammedanism is a farse, a fiasco, a complete and ignominious failure.

    >>>>>

    Saudi Sharia Love Fest 2013: Featuring Islam, the perfect religion of peace on earth on the main stage and starring head choppers and near every other form of freak and brute creation to be found under the sun moon and stars. Break out your wallet and put on your finest pair of blood resistant dancing shoes and come on down and rejoice with us in the full light and love of Sharia Islam!

    The legal system of Saudi Arabia is based on Sharia, Islamic law derived from the Qu’ran and the Sunnah (the traditions) of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. Criminal law punishments in Saudi Arabia include public beheading, stoning, amputation and lashing. Serious criminal offences include not only internationally recognized crimes but also apostasy, adultery, witchcraft and sorcery.

    Criminal law in Saudi Arabia is governed by Sharia and comprises three categories: hudud (fixed Quranic punishments for specific crimes), Qisas (eye-for-an-eye retaliatory punishments), and Tazir, a general category. Hudud crimes are the most serious and include theft, robbery, blasphemy, apostasy, adultery, sodomy and fornication.

    Homosexual acts are punishable by flogging, imprisonment or death. Lashings are a common form of punishment and are often imposed for offences against religion and public morality such as drinking alcohol and neglect of prayer and fasting obligations.

    Polygamy is permitted for men but is limited to four wives at any one time. There is evidence that its practice has increased, particularly among the educated Hejazi elite, as a result of oil wealth. The government has promoted polygamy as part of a return to “Islamic values” program. In 2001, the Grand Mufti (the highest religious authority) issued a fatwa, or opinion, calling upon Saudi women to accept polygamy as part of the Islamic package and declaring that polygamy was necessary “to fight against…the growing epidemic of spinsterhood”. There is no minimum age for marriage in Saudi Arabia and the Grand Mufti reportedly said in 2009 that girls of the age of 10 or 12 were marriageable.

    Men have a unilateral right to divorce their wives (talaq) without needing any legal justification. The divorce is effective immediately. The husband’s obligation is then to provide financial support for the divorced wife for a period of four months and ten days. A woman can only obtain a divorce with the consent of her husband or judicially if her husband has harmed her. In practice, it is very difficult for a Saudi woman to obtain a judicial divorce. The right for men to marry up to four wives, combined with their ability to divorce a wife at anytime without cause, can translate to unlimited polygamy.

    Human rights issues and failings in the rule of law in Saudi Arabia have attracted strong criticism. These include criminal law punishments that are considered as cruel, as well as the position of women, religious discrimination, the lack of religious freedom and the activities of the Saudi Mutaween.

    The U.S. State department considers that “discrimination against women is a significant problem” in Saudi Arabia and that women have few political or social rights. After her 2008 visit, the UN special rapporteur on violence against women noted the lack of women’s autonomy and the absence of a law criminalizing violence against women (See Qur’an, 004.034).

    Every adult woman has to have a close male relative as her “guardian”. As a result, Human Rights organizations have described the position of Saudi women as no different to being a minor, with little authority over their own lives. The guardian is entitled to make a number of critical decisions on a woman’s behalf. These include giving approval for the woman to travel, to hold some types of business licenses, to study at a university or college and to work if the type of business is not “deemed appropriate for a woman.” Even where a guardian’s approval is not legally required, some officials will still ask for it. Women also face discrimination in the courts, where the testimony of one man equals that of two women, and in family and inheritance law (See Qur’an, 002.282).

    There is no legal protection of freedom of speech and Saudis are prohibited from publicly criticizing Islam. In 2010, the U.S. State Department stated that in Saudi Arabia “freedom of religion is neither recognized nor protected under the law and is severely restricted in practice” and that “government policies continued to place severe restrictions on religious freedom”. No faith other than Islam is permitted to be practised. There are no churches or other non-Muslim houses of worship permitted in the country. Proselytizing by non-Muslims is illegal. Conversion by Muslims to another religion (apostasy) carries the death penalty.

  3. says

    Well, their goes the neighborhood…The UK is losing so many neighborhoods to Mahoundians, that soon there will be no neighborhoods left…just one big happy ummah…

  4. says

    More info on this;

    London: Divorce settlements by religious courts including Sharia could soon be allowed under British law after a landmark legal decision. The move comes after a High Court referred a couple’s divorce case for settlement under Beth Din, or Jewish law.

    According to the Times, it is the first time in British legal history when an English family judge has agreed to refer a divorce dispute to a religious court. Experts said that the judgment could have far-reaching consequences and clear the way for other couples to seek a divorce in a religious court, including Sharia, the Telegraph reports.

    The decision was welcomed by the Muslim Council of Britain. A spokesman told the Times that ‘if it leads to the eventual acceptance of Sharia court divorces, then Muslims will be very encouraged.’

    According to the report, lawyers said it was significant that Justice Baker cited the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and his talk on Sharia in 2008 in his ruling. The latest case involved a couple of observant orthodox Jews in their 20s.

    The court heard that they married in 2006 in a Jewish ceremony and initially lived in Israel, returning to London for the birth of their first child. They had planned to move to Toronto but the marriage began to break down and they separated in 2009, shortly after the birth of their second child.

    Disputes over access to the children followed and the father began proceedings under The Hague Convention on child abduction. But before the case came to court in London, the couple decided to refer their disputes to a senior rabbi in the New York Beth Din and asked if the judge would agree.

    According to the report, Justice Baker was persuaded by the couple’s arguments that arbitration in their own religious court would be better than litigation, and in line with their beliefs. Justice Baker said he examined the principles used by the Beth Din and ensured that they were in line with the laws in England and Wales.

    The judge did make it clear that the arbitration or ruling by the Beth Din was not binding, the report said. He said that would have made unlawful, because it would be ousting the jurisdiction of the courts, it added.

    The Beth Din published its full ruling on the couple’s case in 2011, but further negotiations meant that a final settlement was reached only last year, and the judgment released by the High Court this week, the report added.

    http://news.in.msn.com/international/divorce-cases-under-sharia-law-in-uk-soon#page=0

  5. says

    Ban sharia in the UK. Close all existing sharia courts. Top of the list, ban female genital mutilation.

    ZERO TOLERANCE for offenders.

  6. says

    Once again, we see Muslims using Jews to get what they want. Muslims compare “Islamophobia” to the Holocaust, they compare “halal” with kosher, and beth din courts with sharia law.

    And the dumb infidel goes along with it.

  7. says

    Sharia in the UK: Sharia divorces could be allowed under British law after legal ruling

    This article is almost completely unhelpful in explaining exactly what Sharia divorce is.
    ……………

    Yes. While Westerners tend to think of anything sort of the horrific amputations and stonings of Shari’ah to be quite benign, this is not so.

    More:

    It does say that “men have the right of unilateral divorce under classical Sharia” and that a Sunni Muslim divorce is effective when the man tells his wife that he is divorcing her,” but otherwise the only information it provides is this: “A marriage can be terminated by the husband in the talaq process, or by the wife seeking divorce through khul’.”

    That’s just nomenclature. The Telegraph doesn’t explain that while talaq is unilateral and all a man has to do is tell his wife that she is divorced, khul is much more complicated. The woman initiates the process but must obtain her husband’s consent for the divorce, return the dowry, and go through a waiting period before marrying again. So essentially she has no rights if her husband does not agree to the divorce, and can emerge from the process penniless after she has provided compensation to her husband.
    ……………

    Yes. Very often a woman seeking a divorce finds the ruling delay for long periods, or simply denied outright by the Imam. Even wife beating and attempted murder are not grounds for divorce.

    In addition, the woman almost never receives custody of the children unless her husband is completely disinterested. Even then, the father frequently takes custody of the children from his wife, then passes off their care to some female relative.

    The best interests of the children are rarely considered.

    More:

    Experts said that the judgment could have far-reaching consequences and clear the way for other couples to seek a divorce in a religious court, including Sharia.

    The decision was welcomed by the Muslim Council of Britain.
    ……………

    Of course it was. Not only will this allow for ugly Islamic divorces, but it will give the whole vile code of Shari’ah a foot in the door in civilized Britian.

    More:

    Lawyers said it was significant that Mr Justice Baker cited the former Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, and his talk on Sharia in 2008 in his ruling.
    ……………

    Yes”but Rowan Williams is a dhimmi tool. The fact that he was ever Archbishop of Canterbury is simply shameful.