Canada: Use of Sharia law by Muslims okay, report says

Toronto Star ^ | 12/20/04 | CANADIAN PRESS

[Pikamax]

Use of Sharia law by Muslims okay, report says

CANADIAN PRESS

Ontario Muslims should have the same rights as Roman Catholics and Jews in the province to seek arbitration based on religious law for family disputes and inheritance cases, a report by former attorney general Marion Boyd concludes.

"The Arbitration Act should continue to allow disputes to be arbitrated using religious law," Boyd recommends in her report to the Ontario government.

Boyd was appointed to study the issue after the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice requested the right to offer religious-based arbitrations for family disputes based on Sharia law.

The proposal ran into opposition from women's groups, legal organizations and the Muslim Canadian Congress, who all warned that the 1,400-year-old Sharia law does not view women as equal.

But Boyd determined that Ontario should continue to allow religious-based arbitrations and mediations, including Sharia law, and recommended strengthening protections by requiring both parties to first seek independent legal advice.

However, another of her 46 recommendations would allow people seeking mediation to waive independent legal advice.

Boyd also recommends that mediators screen each party separately about issues of power imbalance and domestic violence before they enter into an arbitration agreement.

She also said the government should work with mediators and other professional organizations to develop a standard screening process for domestic violence.

A spokesman said Attorney General Michael Bryant would not be available today to comment on the report, but added the government would study Boyd's findings "very closely

[Chemist_Geek]

If I am not mistaken Sharia law has it's own enforcers and it ain't the local PD.

As has been stated, over and over, provisions of any contract which are illegal, such as "Sharia enforcers" stoning someone, are void. As a matter of fact, private attempts to enforce those provisions are themselves illegal and would be dealt with by the appropriate law enforcement agency.

[Chemist_Geek]

Here's a picture for you. You ought to be applauding it; it's the government suppression of a religion.

Destruction of a statue of the Buddha at Bamiyan, Afghanistan, March 2001.

[NorthOf45]

I think can hear the "call to prayer" over the newly installed public address systems already!

You must be hearing the ones in Michigan.

[NorthOf45]

People sure do have a lot to say over an article from the Red Star (a liberal mouthpiece) about ONE report, which appears to contain the findings of only ONE individual.

[antiRepublicrat]

Why are moslems immigrating to western countries,

The ones I know came for better education or to escape the extreme fundamentalist Muslims that took over their own country.

[antiRepublicrat]

, then you lose a factor incredibly important in a free, just, democracy: Equality under the law. This would be an example of decadent moral relativism, which is the death of free societies.

I agree. But then you can't deny people the right to settle their differences peacefully according to their own beliefs.

[antiRepublicrat]

It's a problem because women in Muslim society are just ahead of the family goat or maybe right behind said goat.

Have to frame that in the right context. According to historical Muslim Quran interpretation or Wahabbi thought? As is in the Quran or as is practiced in many Muslim countries?

A lot of cultures in Muslim countries definitely believe women have the position you say. If they were to follow their holy book, then the women would have a much better position. So, are these Shari'a courts going to be Wahabbi-like (then I fear for the women) or will they go according to Shari'a and enforce the rights given to women?

[beaver fever]

I don't think people are getting Modernman's point. Sharia 'law' is not being given the force of law. Sharia is only being accepted as a set of guiding principles for the 'arbitration' of civil cases, notably divorce but also some contract or tort cases.

Whatever the outcome of Shari arbitration the agreements cannot supercede or nullify existing precedent under Canadian Law. Any agreement must be reviewed by a judge before it takes force in order to ensure that neither party has been coerced and that the agreement doesn't violate sections of the Charter of Rights.

In family law cases, for instance, if a father sued for exclusive child custody on the grounds that he was was better able financially, to provide for the children and at the same time refused to pay alimony or child support to his exwife, he would lose the case.

In these cases a family court judge, being the final arbiter, would almost certainly rule that the husbands conduct was malicious and unfair.

Although it is completely consistent with Sharia Law to award child custody to the father regardless of the financial status of the mother, this aspect of Sharia is inconsistent with Canadian family law and no judge would accede to it.

Also, the proposal to allow use of Sharia Law in civil arbitration does not apply to criminal charges under the Criminal Code of Canada, for reasons which should be obvious to everyone.

[VOA]

Canada: Use of Sharia law by Muslims okay, report says

I suspect there will be a slight adjustment to "Canadian Shari'a"
when the first death-sentence for adultery is handed down.

They'll just sentence the Shari'a convict to being left outside during
a winter's night without clothing.

[Isabelle]

Stoning, sawing off heads, worship of satan; alias allah.
Way to go Canada.

[aimhigh]

And they do. But how is this different from letting the rabbi or priest decide things?

The rabbi and priest don't promote a religion that has the goal of overthrowing the United States. Islam is a governmental religion. Their form of justice demands it. When they say "Islam is peace", they are defining peace, not Islam. That peace is the result of enforcing Islamic justice.

[processing please hold]

Excuse me.....didn't the Taliban blow up the buddist statues? Wasn't the Taliban both religious and governmental leaders?

[texasbluebell]

If that is so, why are so many demanding that we change to their way of living? Why must we accomadate them? Why not the other way around?

Why does shar'ia law have to be instituted for them in Canada?

Why don't they assimilate to the western countries that they're so desperate to live in?

[BobL]

We're just going in circles.

The bottom line is, for all its faults, the vast majority of Freepers think that our system of justice works just fine, and we are not all that impressed with the record of Sharia throughout the world.

You may have an ideal, peaceful, version of Sharia that you want to get Western countries to adapt, but you will not get very far with us Freepers.

Not too long ago, many of us had to deal with the apologists for Communism. They were people that said the Communism was fine, it just wasn't being implemented properly, and that we should give it a chance. So, we've seen it before.

I'll make you guys a deal. You get the Muslim countries to claim to use Sharia to start respecting human rights, especially for women, and I'll drop my objection to Sharia. But I think that will be a long time, and I may not be around for that day.

But for the United States, at least right now, most of us are never going to support minorities imposing parallel justice systems, however you guys may try to package them, - NEVER.

[Bob J]

""The Arbitration Act should continue to allow disputes to be arbitrated using religious law,"

Which means there is no law, just what the local guy with the biggest hat says.

[processing please hold]

You're right, we are just going 'round and 'round.

Shira law can kiss my butt. Those who support shira law can kiss my butt as well.

[PGalt]

Can Canadians (or Americans) ask for their law to be arbitrated in Muslim countries?

[WhatHappenedtoAmerica]

The muslims now own Canada.

I read a book, "The Secrets of the Koran" written by a Canadian.

At the end, he predicted that Canada, based on their demographics and parliamentary system, would be the first Western nation ruled by a Muslim,

Then the oil rich Arab world would ensure that he would be an overwhelming success, with both their cooperation and dollars.

Then other Western nations would "see the light" and follow suit.

[BobL]

"Shira law can kiss my butt. Those who support shira law can kiss my butt as well."

I think that we just need to stay on top of topics like this, and the Muslim apologists will eventually get the message and move on.

They'll find a much more receptive audience in the Democratic Underground. It's the kooks on the left that have teamed up with these apologists in their effort to seize power. Talk about making a deal with the devil (figure of speech, not bigotry). The libs in Europe won't know what hit them if these guys ever take power.

[Texas Songwriter]

Yea, in the Detroit area they are crawling all over each other like ant. Once they get a toehold they take over the town. Remeber Bagwan Shreragnesh in Antelope, Oregon. It nearly took an act of congress to evict the bastards. They made life hell for the inhabitants (American) of Antelope. No longer is there a melting pot in America where immigrants insinuate themselves into American life. Now it is Balkanization. America is a mosaic of different cultures which will be at each others throats if immigration reform isn't enacted, and quick.