PDA

View Full Version : Google Search - Sharia Law in Britain?


modtinbasher
1st Dec 2006, 20:03
I thought to myself, what is going on here, is this Britain or is this Britanistan? I'd heard a whisper about this so I did a search, this is an excerpt copied from the Hindustan Times (HindustanTimes .com)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sharia law often used to settle disputes in Britain
http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gif
Indo-Asian News Service
http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gif
London, December 1, 2006
http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gif

The Islamic sharia law derived from the Koran is being used in parts of Britain as an alternative to English criminal law as migrants and citizens with roots in Islamic countries feel more bound by the traditional law.
In several instances, the sharia laws are given more respect than those of Britain even though it has no binding status in Britain.
Evidence of this has been produced in a BBC Radio 4 programme Law in Action.
Reports say that Aydarus Yusuf, 29, a youth worker from Somalia, recalled a stabbing case that was decided by an unofficial Somali "court" sitting in Woolwich, southeast London.
Yusuf said a group of Somali youths were arrested on suspicion of stabbing another Somali teenager.
The victim's family told the police it would be settled out of court and the suspects were released on bail.
A hearing was convened and elders ordered the assailants to compensate their victim.
"All their uncles and their fathers were there," said Yusuf. "So they all put something towards that and apologised for the wrongdoing."
A Scotland Yard spokesperson said it was common for the police not to proceed with assault cases if the victims decided not to press charges, but added that cases of domestic violence including rape might go to trial regardless of the victim's wishes.
Yusuf told the programme that he felt more bound by the traditional law of his birth than by the laws of his adopted country.
"Us Somalis, wherever we are in the world, we have our own law," he said. "It's not sharia, it's not religious - it's just a cultural thing."
Sharia's great strength was the effectiveness of its penalties, he said. Those who appeared before religious courts would avoid a repeat offence so as not to bring shame on their families, according to a report in the Daily Telegraph.
Prakash Shah, a senior lecturer in law at Queen Mary University of London, said such tribunals "could be more effective than the formal legal system".
Faizul Aqtab Siddiqi, a barrister and principal of Hijaz College Islamic University, near Nuneaton, Warwick, said this type of court had advantages for Muslims.
"It operates on a low budget, very small timescales and the process and the laws of evidence are far more lenient and it's less awesome an environment than the English courts," he said.
Siddiqi predicted that there would be a formal network of Muslim courts within a decade.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, folks, how long will it be before we see stonings of adulterers and miscreants hung from JCB's? Is that what we want in our country? Will this network
http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gifof Muslim courts recognise the 'Human Rights' that have become enshrined in our laws? Or is it basically, and actually, one law for some, and one law for another?

I can just imagine this, 'Sorry your honour, but I'm a Bush Baptist, or I'm Church of Boddington's, or I'm sorry your honour, I'm Monastry of Mork (nanoo, nanoo). Can I have my case settled according to Martian law please? Not on your nelly!

In East Anglia we are seeing a multitude of Eastern Europeans in our local press being done for driving without insurance/tax etc., they get off very lightly after telling the beak that 'we don't actually have that law in our country'! So, what's the attraction of this place then, where they might have to toe the line? There's more mites in a pound of cheese I reckon.

Just how long is this twaddle to go on? Is there no end in sight?
http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gif

terryJones
1st Dec 2006, 20:31
It will probably continue until we get a government with balls.
The problem we have is that no-one in 'power' is prepared to stand up and say that this PC has gone far too far and he doesn't care if he offends any immigrant, THIS is the law in Britain. Then point out the chunnel runs both ways, and we don't want the crap any more.
It's like the immigrant centre they trashed in the week. One way to get out on bail, wreck the centre. If they do not like the treatment, as Norman Tebbit said, 'On Your Bike'. Personally I think they should have turned on the fire hoses, then hope we had a freezing night.
Oh Look, another flying pig...

rab-k
1st Dec 2006, 20:36
Seems that the law in England & Wales is structured in a way which permits this kind of thing to happen.

A Scotland Yard spokesperson said it was common for the police not to proceed with assault cases if the victims decided not to press charges, but added that cases of domestic violence including rape might go to trial regardless of the victim's wishes.

I'm no expert, but here in Scotland it is the Procurator Fiscal Service that decides whether anyone should stand trial for an alleged crime, the victim having no say in the matter.

In circumstances similar to those described in the IANS article, the Police would submit their report to the PFS for them alone to decide whether there was a case to be answered.

Is it the case under English Law that the Crown Prosecution Service would only hear about such a case if the Police forwarded a report at the request of the alleged victim? Could undue pressure be put upon victims not to press charges for the sake of resolving an incident in some other 'court'?

If so, perhaps the procedures applied under Scots Law should be adopted by the English and Welsh system to avoid this apparent parallel judicial system becoming more widespread, as I believe the scenario descibed in the IANS article could not happen here once the Police have become involved.

flybhx
1st Dec 2006, 21:00
Problem is that it is all very well CPS prosecuting a case without the agreement of the victim but, if the victim refuses to give evidence, it just costs a lot of money to get it to court and then have it thrown out.

I'm not sure how they get round this issue in Scotland although I gather they are less tolerant of contempt of court in terms of refusing to give evidence.

Gouabafla
1st Dec 2006, 21:18
I've seen similar situations in rural Africa, where informal village courts with no legal authority would try offences rather than have people sent to court in town. Justice was faster and generally more geared to serious restitution for the victim rather than some sort of slap on the hand for the offender. In general, victims would far rather have things tried by the village court because they got something out of it.

Now, just bring that across to Somali residents in the UK. One Somali knicks his friend's bike. If the victim complains to the plod he may well not get listened to. If he is, then the whole thing will drag on for months and he'll probably never get his bike back. If he takes the thing to his Somali elders, they will probably have the thief beaten and then force him to pay back the value of the bike. For the victim this is a better result than he is likely to receive from the British legal system.

Our legal system just doesn't seem designed for the needs of the victims of small scale annoying crime. It's fine for prosecuting organised crime but hopeless if your car is broken into. It's no wonder that immigrant groups are filling in the vacuum. Mind you, this still leaves most Brits out in the cold with nowhere to go to.

Again, I'm not defending the setting up of Sharia courts in the UK, but I think it is highly understandable in the current climate.

rab-k
1st Dec 2006, 21:37
I gather they are less tolerant of contempt of court in terms of refusing to give evidence.

As a witness you have to give a pre-trial 'Precognition Statement' and you can be required by the Procurator Fiscal to give one under oath before the trial if you decline to give it verbally or in writing. If you then refuse to appear of give evidence you'll have a warrant for your arrest issued for contempt. Happened as recently as last week:


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/6172760.stm

Wedge
1st Dec 2006, 21:50
For policy reasons the Courts will not usually summons a victim in a crime to give evidence if they are not willing to, although recent changes in policy mean that some crimes will be pursued even without a complainant (eg domestic violence).

Even then (unless I'm very much mistaken) the victim would not be summonsed to come to court to give evidence against their will.

Ah yes, and look at that link. We keep being told that only Black and Asian people can be the victim of a racially aggravated offence. It's simply not true, either in England or Scotland. The offence is racially aggravated if racial language is used by the perpetrator, whether the victim is black or white and the Police and the courts take both just as seriously.

Re: Sharia law in the UK. A lot of fuss over nothing. I can confidently predict there won't be a formal network of Islamic courts within a decade. That said if immigrant communities want to deal with some crimes themselves without engaging the authority of the state, then that's their prerogative. A victim is always free to make a complaint to the police if they wish to do so.

Fg Off Max Stout
1st Dec 2006, 22:02
"Us Somalis, wherever we are in the world, we have our own law,"

Oh no you don't, my son. It is plain to see that this country is losing the plot, thanks to crappy government and creeping PC insanity, amongst many factors. That is no justification, however, for even suggesting that the legal system should apply differently to different groups within the population.

I have no opposition whatsoever to immigration. Britain has gained hugely from positive, enthusiastic, well-qualified immigrants and has a moral obligation to accept genuine refugees. I do object to immigrants who see us as a soft touch, bring nothing positive and treat the UK as the doss-house of Europe. Regardless of which class of immigrant comes here, they must all embrace and respect our culture, law, language and traditions.

When I travel to abroad, I abide by my host nation's laws, accept its culture and respect its religion, and I expect the same in return. The day that complying with the British legal system becomes optional for immigrants will be the day that the UK ceases to exist as a sovereign nation. Instead, it will be nothing more than a federation of ghettoized colonies of foreign empires.

Although, I don't see this atually happening, it is a great concern that many seem to give the idea credence. We need a strong leadership that can nip ideas like this in the bud, and more importantly prevent the situation in the first place where such ideas arise. Unfortunately, Tony and his PC elite a reaping what they have sown and playing into the hands of extremists, indigenous and foreign. The BNP membership office and the Finsbury Park Mosque will be running at capacity because our Government does not respect our own culture and there are plenty who will take advantage of that.

Nearly time for me to leave the 'old country' behind and go to Oz, NZ or Canadia. Places with Brit cultural roots but less bullsh1t.

rab-k
1st Dec 2006, 22:16
A victim is always free to make a complaint to the police if they wish to do so.

Ah, now there's the rub, how do you ensure that undue pressure has not been brought to bear upon the victim to drop a complaint which may lead to charges in the English Court, in favour of the matter being taken up in the Sharia Court? (In particular, crimes against women). IMHO, this is where a system whereby the victim determines whether charges are brought falls down.

galaxy flyer
1st Dec 2006, 22:18
Clearly a case of the inmates taking over the prison, if you excuse the analogy. What would Churchill do? WWCD.

DG101
1st Dec 2006, 22:52
Courts, other than the generally recognised Crown Courts, have been operating in England for a long time. Christians are subject to Church Courts, which have been known to rule (pontificate?) on matters of morality. Other faiths may have similar jurisdictions. Here's an example (http://www.unitedsynagogue.org.uk/lbd.html) of one that rules on matters that many may consider are not strictly religious.

Al Fakhem
2nd Dec 2006, 03:46
"Us Somalis, wherever we are in the world, we have our own law," he said. "It's not sharia, it's not religious - it's just a cultural thing."

http://www.hindustantimes.com/on/img/0.gif

And we all know, of course, what an absolute sh1thouse Somalia is. :p