Islamic sharia courts in Britain are now legally binding

Discussion in 'The ARRSE Hole' started by squiffy_parsons, Sep 15, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. If I remember correctly the muslims were saying a while ago that any fears that sharia law would become or interfere with British Law were unfounded...............
  2. Biped

    Biped LE Book Reviewer

    So, if a Muslim wants to sue me, or accuse me of an offense under Sharia law, maybe he can insist the case is heard in a sharia court rather than a British court - maybe that'll be the next thing.
  3. I'll start the bus!!!!!
  4. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    The way I understand it is that any 'arbitration' is legally binding if both parties agree to it being. The only court of law that is legally binding if one party disagrees is the National system.

    This is the same for any legal arbitration, so you and I have a legal dispute and ask MDN to provide an arbritation service then that is legally binding (so long as it doesn't break any national laws).

    Basically another non-story. Although moving towards a story if it gets momentum.


    p.s. I'm not a lawer and wait to be corrected by those more learned than I.
  5. No need, what muslims do in the UK has ceased to outrage or surprise anyone.
  6. None story.

    Just flicked through the arbitration act HERE.

    sharia courts could say whatever the hell they want, they still have to fullfil line 2

    Can't see even our Criminal Protection Service agreeing that a stoning, beheading or enforced apology from a victim of Domestic Crime would be "in the public interest" Shariah courts have no legal authority to call anyone to them in the first place, so trying to use this on a none muslime is a none starter as well.
  7. Or maybe, just maybe, they will run like the Jewish and Christian courts have run in this country for over a century - but thats hardly worth getting the outrage bus first paraded for is it
  8. Ok back to the garage for you my beauty...
  9. So it isn't really a court then but a binding arbitration. What I mean is that both parties have agree to be bound by the decision before the process starts and it is not forced on anyone to be involved.

    That is not a court. Agreement to abide by a court decision is not elective, it is enforced.
  10. Except that the sharia courts are now dealing with criminal law and exploiting a legal loophole to do so.
  11. No more so than "Judge Judy".
  12. According to an anonymous source you provide no link to? Maybe its not happened at all. If however you could provide evidence of this.....
  13. They can deal with all they want.

    I could set up a tent in my garden, call it "Aunty Stellas Wonderful Emporium Of Justice" and dish out arbitrary (Death, of course) sentences.

    Wouldn't mean jack sh1t though unless both the victim and perpetrator agreed to be legally bound by my pre determined death sentence.

    And even then if it went to a REAL Court they would immediatley say that my death sentence by Ant Eater bites was not in the Public Interest.

    If these idiots are stupid enough to agree to be bound by a sharia "courts" decisions in the first place, then they deserve all the buckets of stupid that they get.
  14. Sympathetic_Reaction

    Sympathetic_Reaction LE Book Reviewer

    No still a non-story. You can use the civil court to deal with a criminal matter, as has been done with several high profile cases where the criminal court failed to get a conviction and the claimants took it to civil court to get compensation.

    The criminal matter is still a criminal matter, if it hasn't been reported to the police then the Police/CPS can still investigate and charge under their own powers, but will struggle to get a conviction if the victim won't press charges.

    Again non-story.

  15. Your not really getting this outrage thing are you SR