The United Kingdom, which of late seems to be turning into a basketcase of nannystate multi-culti idiocy, gets no respect around here. I see no reason for that to change.
Five sharia courts have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester and Nuneaton, Warwickshire. The government has quietly sanctioned that their rulings are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court. Previously, the rulings were not binding and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.
Lawyers have issued grave warnings about the dangers of a dual legal system and the disclosure drew criticism from Opposition leaders.
While some of our readers feel that "it helps a society run more smoothly when people know what their roles are" under Sharia that smoothness runs in one direction.
There are concerns for women suffering under the Islamic laws, which favours men.
Mr Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons.
The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts.
In the six cases of domestic violence, Mr Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment.
While the Labour government is trying to pass this off as simple "arbitration," where the parties agree to streamlined procedures but follow the law of the land, this is actually a radical departure from what I understand British law to be, a separate legal code that works to the detriment of women's rights, imposed by social pressure. That British courts are now expected to enforce the quaint customs of Sharia is appalling, making second class citizens of British women who happen to be Muslims.
And the Telegraph reports that these Sharia courts will soon be expanding their jurisdiction to "minor crimes." I suppose that means that the maximum punishment they can administer is amputation of a finger, as opposed to a hand.
Mr Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance.
The disadvantage is that the husband was given a second chance to beat his wife.
Via Harry's Place