It hardly helps cohesion if you create new differences

The statement from the Archbishop of Canterbury that some form of Sharia law in the UK is "inevitable", and his view that this would help "community cohesion" are the rantings of the religious nut, I am sorry to say.

Firstly, irrespective of the merits of Sharia or not, cohesion is about people being trated fairly, evenly, and everyone having the same rights. In simple terms, I cannot see how creating new differences and barriers can help with cohesion as they would only serve to demonstrate more clearly differences and would be more divisive.

I was, however, surprised to learn tonight whilst watching the ITV news that Jewish courts operate in this country with some authority.

We cannot lecture on the problems of duel legal systems and the primacy of UK law if Jewish courts are allowed. I do not agree with idea of a Sharian court, neither do I agree with Jewish ones. Our courts, all of them, should be government by laws enacted and put in place be legally elected democratic politicians. We can elect people to make lawas and we can elect people to remove them. That should be the rule.

1 comment:

Quiet_Man said...

People in England can have a civil dispute settled by whatever means they agreed on, be it English, Sharia or Jewish Law, and I believe that under the Arbitration Acts they already can (and the resolution is binding under English Law)
The problems as I see it arises when these court rulings stray into criminal law as opposed to civil law which the Jewish courts cover. Problems will arise if sharia law (which covers civil and criminal acts)is used to hand out a sentence that is illegal by the common law of England (something Jewish courts don't do), frankly it's a Pandora's box best not opened.