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

[Modernman]

Maybe, but, of course, if the Sharia Court does not accept the woman's testimony in this area, then Canadian protections become moot.

There is no such thing as a Sharia Court. In any event, any Muslim woman who wants it can obtain the protection of Canadian law in such a case.

[processing please hold]

It only takes one virus bug, and it spreads from person to person.

[Modernman]

Are you a muslim?

No. I'm from an Eastern Orthodox background, but I consider myself a Deist.

[jpsb]

Sound s like Canada will soon need some Sharia police to enforce the Sharia law. I'm sure thier are more then a few young and not so young men willing to do the job. Bad, very bad decision.

[NetValue]

You are still saying that they can even agree to break the Virginia law (as in discriminate in house rentals) and under Sharia say they are chosing Islamics....not jews or infidels. AND THAT WOULD BE ENFORCABLE AND LEGAL?

Sorry, it just cannot be correct. And it better never be, either.

Islam is already an outrage and its swarming the West. They are willing to fight for Islam and Sharia....and I'm willing to oppose it.

[processing please hold]

"There is no such thing as a Sharia Court. In any event, any Muslim woman who wants it can obtain the protection of Canadian law in such a case".

If that was true....why have Shira law in the first place?

[Bryan24]

THe US needs to declare Islam a cult right now. The US can NOT survive if Islam is allowed to flourish here. The US better wake up.

[Modernman]

Then why bother having the Canadian Government officially sanction Sharia as a parallel legal system.

Because private parties, such as two businessmen, should have the right to have their dispute settled under pretty much whatever law they want.

[Modernman]

It only takes one virus bug, and it spreads from person to person.

Islam is like any other religion- you have to choose to be a Muslim.

[broadsword]

Apology accepted. Carry on soldier (however lame that carrying on may be).

[BobL]

"They really do not have any way to enforce Sharia law on the unwilling."

Oh yes they do! Unlike the Democratic Underground, you'll find the people on FreeRepublic are very smart and will not be tricked. I can't blame you for trying, but you may want to look at some of the threads on the rise of Islam.

We know how it works, how its women have no more freedom than slaves did in the pre Civil War United States. We will not be fooled by people setting up a parallel and barbaric legal system, and then telling us not to worry about it.

I don't know who you are, or where you're from, and I don't care. You have met your match on this web site. Stick to the Mainstream Media, they're much easier to dupe.

[conservativecorner]

The people of Can-a-duh are insane. Nothing else can explain their desire to see their western culture wiped out by radicals who will turn the clock back by 1,000 years. It will make voting easier because women can't vote according to the radicals, and who is more determined in the muslim world than the radicals/terrorists?

[processing please hold]

Thank you.

"No. I'm from an Eastern Orthodox background, but I consider myself a Deist".

That was a new one for me, I had to look it up.

[Modernman]

You are still saying that they can even agree to break the Virginia law (as in discriminate in house rentals)

I'm not saying that at all. If housing discrimination is illegal in VA, you can't contract around that.

and under Sharia say they are chosing Islamics....not jews or infidels. AND THAT WOULD BE ENFORCABLE AND LEGAL?

No. That would violate VA anti-discrimination law and would therefore be unenforceable.

[processing please hold]

You're right, they do have a choice...actually they have two choices.

1)Convert

2)Die

[bill1952]

>A foreign law that treated women as second class citizens would not be enforceable since it violates public policy.

I would hope so, but Sharia does place woman less than equal, and that is rather well known, so how does one accept it as a basis? The women would be under tremendous pressure to accede, and it would be a widening fissure in our society. I think that we are getting pretty close to a tipping point anyway.

>are rabbinical courts in NYC that resolve disputes between members of the Orthodox community in accordance with Talmudic law and NY courts will enforce such decisions.

Now that is something that I had forgotten. Good point.

But what do they resolve? I can understand disputes of faith and even marriage, but are matters of wealth, inheritance, child support and children under such enforceable policy?

[Modernman]

Oh yes they do!

Arbitrations under Sharia have been legal in the US for decades. Has anyone forced you to submit to Sharia yet?

I can't blame you for trying, but you may want to look at some of the threads on the rise of Islam.

I'm quite familiar with Islam. My ancestors were subjegated by Muslims for 400 years before fighting them off.

We will not be fooled by people setting up a parallel and barbaric legal system, and then telling us not to worry about it.

And yet, Sharia arbitrations and choice of law provisions in contracts are legal and enforceable in the US and nothing has happened.

[Chemist_Geek]

Because private parties, such as two businessmen, should have the right to have their dispute settled under pretty much whatever law they want.

The religious bigots want to have government stamp out a faith by force...why not stamp out property rights, too?

Why bother? Let the anti-Muslim religious bigots get their Two Minutes Hate out of their system.

[processing please hold]

He isn't fooling me either Bob, that's why I asked if he was Muslim.