ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases.

The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence.

Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court.

Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims.

It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network’s headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996.

More: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article4749183.ece

*********

I could not believe my eyes when I read this and I totally agree with Elena from Virginia who says: I´m utterly shocked by this. While I´m all for religious freedom, the law of the land should be just that: one law, the same for everyone.

No I can´t believe my eyes either as this is the very first I have heard of this!  There has been mumblings but nothing has been decided I am sure, and there has been nothing on the news.   Hopefully this is just over zealous journalism!

this sounds like a political move to give a rise to nazism. no other plausible explanation.

can smn tell me who asked for sharia courts in England?

This article is from February but it is still interesting.  I didn´t know that the Beth Din was in operation in the UK and has been for many many years.  I haven´t heard any up to date news apart from that which Trudy has given here and I don´t know the "nitty gritty" of the proposals.   However, if they are similar to the way the Beth Din works then it should compliment "the laws of the land" without too much of a problem.  

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm

 Who do you think Tamikidakika?  Muslims (not all I must quickly point out), but those that think they are hard done by in our society who do not like living by the laws of the land they have chosen to live in but want their own rules and laws.

Do you think Turkey will be incorporating some of the UK laws to take account of the number of Brits living there? (a tongue in cheek comment, not meant to offend Turks, but just an example)

 Do you seriously think this would be the case?  I don´t think so!

So there are already Jewish courts in Britain applying the jewish rules?

 I´m not going to get into a long debate about this Libralady, but I´m wondering what is is that I said that warranted an "!".  I don´t know all the facts yet but if it is conducted in a similar manner to the Beth Din, then no, I don´t see a problem.  It´s not about chopping people´s hands off or dealing with criminal law (as far as I know, as I said I don´t know all the details yet). 

For example, if a muslim couple on the verge of divorce feel they can deal with their problems/and issues more comfortably through the new facilities, then I don´t see a problem in allowing them to do this.  If they are prepared to abide by the decisions made, I don´t see a problem.  They don´t HAVE to go through this route, but the fact that they do means they are prepared to abide by the outcome.  I should imagine this will make for more swift proceedings for them.  I think anything agreed also has to then go through UK legal channels to "rubber stamp" it. 

As I´ve said, I´m not sure of all the "nitty gritty", so I´m not going to be negative about it because all that does is whip up a frenzy. 

 As you say perhaps it´s over zealous journalism.

 According to the BBC new article yes.  This may also help:

"Litigation

In Jewish Law, Jewish parties are forbidden to take their civil disputes to a secular court and are required to have those disputes adjudicated by a Beth Din. The London Beth Din sits as an arbitral tribunal in respect of civil disputes and the parties to any such dispute are required to sign an Arbitration Agreement prior to a hearing taking place. The effect of this is that the award given by the Beth Din has the full force of an Arbitration Award and may be enforced (with prior permission of the Beth Din) by the civil courts. At a hearing before the Dayanim, the parties do not require legal representation although they are allowed to have legal or other representation."

taken from : http://www.theus.org.uk/the_united_synagogue/the_london_beth_din/litigation/

I forgot where I read it but this has happened for over a century at least (I´ll have to look it up again).

  I suppose it doesn´t get publicity because it works within the Jewish community and probably doesn´t affect not Jews.  It seems they are "forbidden to take their civil disputes to a secular court" but with the permission of the Beth Din may have the "Arbitration Award. . . enforced by the civil courts".

It is quite possible the Shariar Court may work in a similar manner, I´m not sure, I´ll have to do more research.

 This made by the law,or its their rule ?

İ mean,is it in the British law that its forbidden for them to take their civil disputes to a secular court because they already have their own courts,or its by their rules ?