You are here

Obeying-Secular-Law

  • Summary: 

    There is no surer path to Muslim violence than through the legitimization of Muslim grievance. And once you accept the legitimacy of the grievance, then you are also bound to accept the legitimacy of the violence that follows.

    ...

    The fundamental Muslim grievance is that they are not in power, not just in Israel where the world has accepted their demand to be in power as a wholly moral and legitimate demand, or throughout the Muslim world where Western governments have helped bring the Islamists to power with bombs and political pressure. The fundamental grievance is that they are not in power... everywhere.

    If you believe that Islam is the fundamental law of mankind, that all mankind at one time were Muslims and that there is no true justice except through Islamic law-- then it follows naturally that Muslims have been cheated of their rightful power, that they are forced to live under "atheistic" regimes and that "justice" demands that the world "revert" to Islamic rule.

    It's why the rhetoric of democracy falls notoriously flat when it comes to Islam. Muslims are not out for representation except as a preliminary stage to absolute power. They may route the guardianship of that absolute power power in various ways, through a dictator or some form of popular democracy, but these are only vehicles for the imposition of Islamic law.

    The absolute power of Islamic law is justified by its origin in Allah and the unjust nature of non-Muslim law is equally proven by its lack of divine origin. If you take Islamic assumptions at face value, then this makes perfect sense. Therefore a devout Muslim cannot view a non-Muslim society as just. Equating an infidel code with Sharia is blasphemy. And so the logic of Islam dictates that Western Muslims must view themselves as oppressed.

  • Summary: 

    These cases of openings to a justice parallel to that of the State raise several problems. The first is that the acceptance of parallel court decisions is an acceptance of communitarianism. This calls into question the unity of justice in a territory as well as the equality of men before the law, since depending on the religion of the former, the applicable law would not be the same. The applicability of the ECHR in the signatory countries is questioned or at least restricted in certain areas. Areas of “different right” (sometimes called “no rights” zones) where the signatory State would have accepted more or less officially that its right be derogatory.

    Finally, this raises the question of the acceptability of certain principles or values. The former PACE Rapporteur explained in her note that “The Court has ruled that Sharia law is in compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, but obviously this does not mean that there is absolute incompatibility between the Convention and Islam”      

    This distinction between Sharia and Islam to consider the former as incompatible with the ECHR contrary to the second is not obvious. At the beginning of her note, she states precisely that “Sharia law is understood as being ‘the path to be followed’, that is, the ‘law’ to be obeyed by every Muslim.” If Islam “ordained a law” (Surah 5, verse 48) to every Muslim and “assigned a path” (id.) is sharia, then sharia becomes something consubstantial to Islam. A Muslim may not be a good Muslim if he does not apply the Sharia. There would thus be an incompatibility between the ECHR and Islam, which is not surprising as the need to create human rights in Islam testifies.

     CEDH, Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and others v. Turkey [GC], n° 41340/98, 41342/98, 41343/98 and 41344/98, 13 February 2003, § 123.                                                                                                                            

     Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Compatibility of Sharia law with the European Convention on Human Rights: can States Parties to the Convention be signatories of the ‘Cairo Declaration’? Introductory Memorandum, AS/JUR (2016) 28, 7 October 2016, § 6. All following passages are excerpts from this note, which contains all sources, .

  • Country: 
    Nigeria
    News Date: 
    23/02/2018
    Summary: 

    Islamic law forbids Christians to build new churches. That’s the only law that Mudasiru Owoyale doubtless respects. What Nigerian law says is of no import to him; he considers that to be manmade law, vastly inferior to the supposedly divine law, Sharia.

  • Applying sharia law in England and Wales: independent review

    Image: 

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Independent review by Professor Mona Siddiqui and a review panel of experts into the application of sharia law in England and Wales by sharia councils.

    Admin: The independence and methodology of this review has been seriously questioned.

  • More than a quarter of French Muslims 'support hardline Islam and scores back Sharia'

  • Country: 
    Germany
    News Date: 
    07/02/2017
    Summary: 

    ISLAMIC radicals from the Muslim Brotherhood are attempting to gain a “monopoly” over mosques in the German state of Saxony and impose Sharia law, a local security chief has claimed.

  • Country: 
    Nigeria
    News Date: 
    20/05/2002
    Summary: 

    Religious and ethnic clashes have cost thousands of lives in Nigeria in the past two years and the restoration of strict Islamic law in 12 of Nigeria's 36 states has sparked bloody riots between Christians and Muslims. Now with more harsh Sharia punishments pending, including stoning, whipping, amputation and execution, and the prospect of Sharia being extended to at least one state in the predominantly Christian south, the issue might tear the country apart.

    ...

  • Country: 
    Nigeria
    News Date: 
    20/08/2002
    Summary: 

    An Islamic court in Nigeria yesterday upheld a sentence of death by stoning for a woman accused of adultery. The case is the latest in a series of sentences passed under sharia law - a set of religious laws adopted over the past two years in northern regions of Nigeria, which have predominantly Muslim inhabitants.

    ....

  • Country: 
    France
    News Date: 
    14/02/2018
    Summary: 

    A leading representative of French Muslims urged Emmanuel Macron not to meddle in the organization of France’s second-largest religion, days after the president said he would try to redefine relations between Islam and the state.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    06/02/2018
    Summary: 

    As black and minority women and human rights campaigners, we voice our dismay at the outcome of the  commissioned by the government in 2016.

  • Country: 
    United Kingdom (UK)
    News Date: 
    05/02/2018
    Summary: 

    A controversial review into the state of Sharia law in the United Kingdom and the bodies administering it has revealed the British government to be unaware of exactly how many of the Islamic law councils are operating in the country, an admission of systemic discrimination against women, including the victim of forced marriage being asked to appear alongside her family, with an “inappropriate” adoption of civil legal terms used.

  • The independent review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales

    Image: 

    Author(s):

    Summary: 

    Admin: "Independent" - Hmmmm......

    Over a year ago I was asked by the then Home Secretary to chair an independent review into sharia law, specifically within sharia councils in England and Wales. The review’s terms of reference focused on whether sharia law is being misused or applied in a way that is incompatible with the domestic law in England and Wales, and in particular whether there were discriminatory practices against women who use sharia councils. Over the last two decades there has been an increasing focus on Islam and British Muslims and concern about some of the cultural practices within certain Muslim communities. While Muslim societies are diverse and vary in their lifestyles and attitudes, the rise of extremism is seen as evidence of a lack of social and political integration within many parts of the UK. The observance of sharia loosely translated as Islamic law, but which incorporates various aspects of Muslim life, has also been regarded by some as keeping many Muslims isolated, entrenched and with little social and psychological stake in wider British citizenship and civic life. There are undoubtedly many religio-cultural challenges within some Muslim societies which continue to challenge modern ideals of individual freedom and moral agency, especially relating to women. Women and girls are so often the primary bearers of passing on religious traditions and upholding family honour that their own autonomy and freedoms can be overlooked or denied. These factors often leave them in vulnerable situations. During the course of the review, it soon emerged that religion, culture and gender relations are inextricably intertwined especially when it comes to family matters and personal law. Sharia councils call themselves councils because they deal with aspects of Islamic law. The review was set up because some sharia councils are deemed to be discriminating against women who use their services on matters of marriage and divorce. My colleagues who formed the review panel come from a variety of backgrounds with a wealth of professional experience in family law. Their collegiality and willingness to ask difficult questions have, I hope, made this report honest and intellectually robust. The two imams who acted as advisors gave significant help on matters relating to sharia and the wider communities. As we went through the process of interviews and evidence gathering, it became clear that many Muslim women were seeking help from a diverse range of women’s organisations as well as turning to sharia councils which themselves vary in size and scope. These organisations hold a variety of views about how Muslim women can be helped when facing family and social pressures and given more personal autonomy and agency in their lives. Our fundamental task was to understand why sharia councils exist in the first place and why Muslim men and women, but mainly women, need and use them. I am grateful to everyone who came forward and shared their personal stories. We hope that our recommendations, which result largely from the evidence we heard, can reduce discrimination and offer possible ways forward to help Muslim women gain greater confidence and agency over their lives. Mona Siddiqui, OBE Professor of Islamic and Interreligious Studies

    See also: 

  • Summary: 

    Nonetheless, Khan believes that doing away with the laws would only lead to more violence. ‘I would never get rid of blasphemy legislation,’ he said. ‘You know why? Because I would open the way for lynching mobs. If you accuse anyone of blasphemy, the other person has a right to prove that he’s innocent. But if you take that out, you will have, in villages, some mullah from a mosque instigating people.

    ‘It’s happened to us. In Chitral [a district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa], suddenly [at] this one mosque, this guy claimed that someone had committed blasphemy and he riled the crowd up, and they were going to lynch him and the police saved him. So I think that it is a form of protection for people.’

  • Summary: 

    Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is a Islamic state (al-khilafa), Muslim countries, or non-Muslim countries such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

    ......

    In conclusion, it is necessary by Shariah to abide by the laws of the country one lives in, regardless of the nature of the law, as long as it does not contradict Shariah. However, if the law demands something that is against Islam & Shariah, then it will be necessary to abstain from adhering to it, for the famous Hadith states:

    “There is no obedience of the creation wherein there is disobedience to the Creator.” (Musnad Ahmad).

  • Summary: 

    Muslims are generally obliged to abide by the laws of the land and the country they live in, whether it is a Islamic state (al-khilafa), Muslim countries, or non-Muslim countries such as those in the west, as long as they are not ordered to practice something that is against Shariah. If they are forced by the law to commit a sin, then in such a case, it will not just be unnecessary to abide by the law, rather impermissible.

    .....

    In conclusion, it is necessary by Shariah to abide by the laws of the country one lives in, regardless of the nature of the law, as long as it does not contradict Shariah. However, if the law demands something that is against Islam & Shariah, then it will be necessary to abstain from adhering to it, for the famous Hadith states:

    “There is no obedience of the creation wherein there is disobedience to the Creator.” (Musnad Ahmad).

Subscribe to Obeying-Secular-Law