Following is an example I fround from 2004. I know other religions do practice and apply church law through their own courts which go way beyond counseling or the kind of mediation you seem to suggest.
After a four-day trial, the Ecclesiastical Court of the Diocese of Lexington unanimously found the Rev. Christopher Platt guilty of embezzlement and conduct unbecoming a member of the clergy, as charged in the presentment of the Standing Committee of the diocese under canon IV.1.1.(A)and J of the canons of the Episcopal Church. Transactions totaling more that $48,000 were at issue in the case.
Presiding Judge Mann Valentine announced that a sentencing hearing is scheduled for June 10, 2004 at 10 a.m. in the Tilford Room of Christ Church Cathedral. The court’s recommendation will be given to Bishop Stacy Sauls. It is his obligation to impose the discipline, which could be a reprimand, suspension or deposition.
The charges stemmed from a presentment filed against Platt, former canon to the ordinary, administrator for the diocese, and chaplain at St. Augustine’s Chapel at the University of Kentucky, after discrepancies in records for the Bishop’s Discretionary Fund, over which Platt was a signatory, were discovered as the books were reviewed following a change in administrative officer for the diocese. Accounts at St. Augustine’s Chapel, over which Platt was signatory , were subsequently reviewed with numerous transactions questioned for authorization and documentation.
Lexington ecclesiastical court returns guilty verdict against Platt
What I am looking for are parallel legal systems to which people turn to resolve issues they wish not to pursue in Civil or Criminal Courts. As you see, though voluntary, they do exist.
> As you see, though voluntary, they do exist.
I obviously don't know the details of the case you cite, however, I don't believe from what I read that civil law was shut out. It appears that civil law was not involved. Both sides may have decided not to press charges in civil court and decided to pursue the course you mention. I can see why the accused would agree to that. I did not see where imprisonment was one of the outcomes. However, that is not the same as what the Muslims want (at least from what I have read about it).
Voluntary is not part of what they want. As you can see where ever it has been applied (such as Nigeria), it is enforced on believer and non-believer alike. That is not voluntary and should never be allowed in any Western country.