Now some, such as Melanie Phillips, who is unsurprisingly sympathetic towards Beth Din courts, claim link that they are nothing like Sharia courts, and also that they aren't recognised under English law .
The United Synagogue website, which encompasses the London Beth Din, isn't terribly clear, but the closest it gets to suggesting that the Times is right is this passage regarding litigation:
"In Jewish Law, Jewish parties are forbidden to take their civil disputes to a secular court and are required to have those disputes adjudicated by a Beth Din. The London Beth Din sits as an arbitral tribunal in respect of civil disputes and the parties to any such dispute are required to sign an Arbitration Agreement prior to a hearing taking place. The effect of this is that the award given by the Beth Din has the full force of an Arbitration Award and may be enforced (with prior permission of the Beth Din) by the civil courts. At a hearing before the Dayanim, the parties do not require legal representation although they are allowed to have legal or other representation."- link
The reason why this is important is because of the Sun's leader:
"BRITAIN can have only one legal system. We thought the Government understood that.
In February, Gordon Brown said: “Religious law should be subservient to British criminal and civil law.”
Yet seven months later we learn that Islamic sharia law has been sneakily adopted into British law." link
but this is nothing to do with this government, and it hasn't been sneakily adopted into British law, unless it was without debate 12 years ago. If we're going to blame anyone, let's blame the Conservatives.
"A clause in the 1996 Arbitration Act allows Muslim tribunals to make rulings in civil cases using sharia law, enforceable by British courts, if both sides agree. We must not allow this parallel justice system."
If we're not going to allow civil Sharia courts to rule on divorce etc though, when both parties are agreed, are we also going to allow the Beth Din to continue, considering that's also a parallel justice system, and which must also therefore encourage segregation and isolation?
Isn't it that at the moment almost anything goes when it comes to criticising Muslims because of what they supposedly want (which the Sun also has a role in promoting considering the coverage it continues to give to completely unrepresentative morons like Anjem Choudary) while if similar comment was made on Jews and their similar legal system, the accusations of anti-semitism would be flying?
[+/-] show/hide this post
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home