PaulK writes:
I'm stating that Sharia law has a valid place in a democratic country as an option for resolving civil disputes
OK. I think most people agree that. Even harsh critics of it believe that it can serve a useful function and I'm tending towards that position.
- if both parties agree.
and are fully able to understand and agree without family, cultural or religious pressures
I'm further pointing out that British law grants it that place - and no more.
It is not at all clear what UK law grants. The councils opperate outside UK law - they a private hearings and have no validity in civil law. Yet many courts tell their applicants that their judgement is final and binding. They are not. They often attempt to rule in criminal cases which they may not.
Some MATs operate within the laws of arbitration but even then the Family court can overrule any decision made there and any decisions made that break UK civil law in other ways can not stand. But virtually no arbitration decisions are taken to civil law. The evidence is that family and community pressure prevents this.
There is concern that some of these courts go beyond their powers and that many women who are forced to use them are pressured into accepting decisions which are discriminatory and against their interests.
My position at the moment is that the whole system needs oversight and reform - it's not transparent and records are not kept. It's simply not compatible with any form of progressive liberal democratic process that values equality and puts the wellbeing of the child in family law at the top of the pile for justice.
But if it could be made transparent with regulation and reformed to come into line with existing legal processes it could serve a useful function.
Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.