1
   

Sharia to be intruduced into English law?

 
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 07:43 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

I remember that it was you, Steve, who wanted a special investigation about a deadly accident in Paris. By a British coroner. About an accident in France. Closed by the French authorities after all was done according to French law (which is the law in France).
But they were two separate jurisdictions. Some people here seem to want the operation of sharia law within the jurisdiction of English law...but as I said I'm no lawyer.

[But since you mention it do you recall the verdict (after 10 years waiting and 3 changes of coroner)? Diana was unlawfully killed!!!]
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 07:46 am
@Walter Hinteler,
I couln't find a transcript of Hockman's speech at the National Liberal Club.

However, Hockman said similar already earlier.
On July 4, 2008, the Telegraph reported:

Quote:
Stephen Hockman QC, a former chairman of the Bar Council, said: "It is vital and inevitable that sharia will become part of British law in some shape or form.

"Given the world situation and our own substantial Muslim population it is vital that we now look at ways to integrate Muslim culture into our own traditions.

"Otherwise we will find that there is a significant section of our society which is increasingly alienated, with very dangerous results.

"There should be a standing committee comprising of parliamentarians, lawyers and religious leaders to consider how this could be achieved and what specific legal changes might be framed."


He said nearly exactly the very same just now.

Where's the difference?

OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 07:51 am
@gungasnake,
Is he related to Chamberlain ?





David
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 10:49 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Quote:
Stephen Hockman QC, a former chairman of the Bar Council, said: "It is vital and inevitable that sharia will become part of British law in some shape or form.

"Given the world situation and our own substantial Muslim population it is vital that we now look at ways to integrate Muslim culture into our own traditions.

"Otherwise we will find that there is a significant section of our society which is increasingly alienated, with very dangerous results.
So in order to alleviate the possibility of "very dangerous results" it is "vital and inevitable" that sharia should become part of British law. Does the same apply in Germany France and the USA? It just seems a nonsense to me Walter, what is so wrong with British law as it stands that makes it intolerable for (some) Muslims?
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 11:01 am
@Steve 41oo,
Quote:
Does the same apply in Germany France and the USA?


HAH! Good luck with that here. We're already at odds over getting biblical law incorporated into our civil laws.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 28 Nov, 2008 11:58 am
@Steve 41oo,
Any legal system rules for itself which foreign norms and up to what degree are accepted.
On the level of courts there's no 'legal multiculturalism'.
What we have here in Germany, however, is that in special cases there might be a need to aplly a different than German law.

Any (strictly spoken) religious rules from the sharia are guaranteed by our Basic Law (constitution).
Definitely sharia can't be used within the public law (included criminal law).


There's a rather small part of civil law, where sharia can be and is used: for instance, if there's a promise to give the future wife a 'mahr' or in any trade agreements which want to avoid paying interest ...

Then you find it regarding widow's pension ... with up to four widows. (The legal reason for that is quite simple: emancipation of the wives. Though polygamy is totally unlaw - the widows are under the protection of the Basic Law - and their legal claims.

(Source for above: Mathias Rohe, chair of civil law, private international law and comparative law, Tübingen university; Rohe in Juristenzeitung [German Law Journal], JZ 17/2007, 62th year, pages 801-806; and a summarised script by Rohe from his new book "Islamic Law - today and in the past" ['Das islamische Recht - Geschichte und Gegenwart', which will be published next year.])
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Mon 1 Dec, 2008 11:53 pm
The problem with incorporating Sharia Law into the western legal system is wrongheaded. Muslim women feel that Sharia Law is misogynistic. Female genital circumcision (the clitoris and sometimes the labia are cutoff) is practiced in some Muslim countries. Some Muslim women do not want to wear scarves, burkhas whatever as required by the Sharia Law. By incorporating it into the western legal system Muslims are forced to obey Sharia Rules whether they are religious or not. Democracy is about freedom so they should be free to follow the Sharia Law or not. When a couple is before Muslim court they should be free to accept or decline the Sharia Law. For the couple or person who wishes to follow the Sharia Law there is nothing stopping him or her. By incorporating Sharia Law all Muslims are forced into following Sharia Law which is a bad thing.
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Tue 2 Dec, 2008 01:34 am
Walter [et al]

You have all managed to overlook the basis of 'law' as it is practised in the UK and the Commonwealth nations. Walter, I can understand it in your case - the nature of European legal systems are what is called 'black letter' - the written law has precedence. All that is needed is a good magistrate to ascertain whether the law has been correctly applied. This is the 'Roman' system.

The 'English system' is not as formal, law is 'interpreted' not applied. This is the 'Common Law' - a system of precedents. That's why we need the lawyers, barristers and Queens Counsels. They are not looking for a hard and fast rule to apply, they are looking for a principle in law that has been upheld by precedent.

This is a huge difference. Parliament is free to make laws, but the courts (ie judges) are the ones that interpret and apply it. The Common Law is not a fixed body of legislation, it necessarily reacts to the world it inhabits. To insist that you can just tack on another legal code and that would actually stick is nonsense.

The arbiters (judges and barristers) are not Muslims. They may take Muslim sensibilities into account in the courtroom, but that is about it. Even if the British Parliament went through an election and the majority of seats were held by Muslims who were also members of a radical Muslim political party - it would not matter to those who carry out the interpretation of law. They would still be free to make their interpretations on the body of law already in place.

To go around claiming that 'laws' are somehow quasi-religious in nature is total BS. You lot need to take a deep breath and count to ten (zehn) or something....
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 3 Dec, 2008 02:24 pm
Toward the end of the Taliban,
I read that for some religious infraction,
of one of its Moslem citizens,
being flayed (that must sting!)
and buried alive, which is
probably unsanitary, if he
does not have his skin anymore
to keep the bacteria from
the grave dirt out of his system.

Will the English have to bow down
toward Mecca and pray 7 times a day, now ?
0 Replies
 
Mr Stillwater
 
  1  
Reply Thu 4 Dec, 2008 01:32 am
Again, the UK still has to catch up with the US:

Quote:
Appearing Wednesday on the "Nevada Newsmakers" television show, Las Vegas mayor Oscar Goodman suggested that those who deface freeways with graffiti should have their thumbs cut off.

"I'm saying maybe you put them on TV and cut off a thumb," Goodman recommended. "That may be the right thing to do."

Wait, there's more.

"I also believe in a little bit of corporal punishment going back to the days of yore, where examples have to be shown," Goodman said. "I'm dead serious," said Goodman, adding, "Some of these (children) don't learn. You have got to teach them a lesson, and this is coming from a criminal defense lawyer."
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Dec, 2008 05:22 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Any legal system rules for itself which foreign norms and up to what degree are accepted.
On the level of courts there's no 'legal multiculturalism'.
What we have here in Germany, however, is that in special cases there might be a need to aplly a different than German law.

Any (strictly spoken) religious rules from the sharia are guaranteed by our Basic Law (constitution).
Definitely sharia can't be used within the public law (included criminal law).


There's a rather small part of civil law, where sharia can be and is used: for instance, if there's a promise to give the future wife a 'mahr' or in any trade agreements which want to avoid paying interest ...

Then you find it regarding widow's pension ... with up to four widows. (The legal reason for that is quite simple: emancipation of the wives. Though polygamy is totally unlaw - the widows are under the protection of the Basic Law - and their legal claims.

(Source for above: Mathias Rohe, chair of civil law, private international law and comparative law, Tübingen university; Rohe in Juristenzeitung [German Law Journal], JZ 17/2007, 62th year, pages 801-806; and a summarised script by Rohe from his new book "Islamic Law - today and in the past" ['Das islamische Recht - Geschichte und Gegenwart', which will be published next year.])
thanks for that Walter...a considered and thoughtful response which deserves consideration and thought...but right now I'm off to bed Smile and so is Mrs S listening to Mahler Ich bin der Welt abhanden gekommen.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/23/2024 at 08:23:01