Appellate court hands big defeat to Shariah activists

  The advance of Shariah, that Islamic religious law that also addresses politics, finance and more, has sustained a huge blow at the hands of the Court of Appeal, the second-highest court in England and Wales. That judicial body ruled that the Islamic marriage contract, known as nikah in Arabic, is not valid under English…

The post Appellate court hands big defeat to Shariah activists appeared first on WND.

(Image courtesy Pixabay)

The advance of Shariah, that Islamic religious law that also addresses politics, finance and more, has sustained a huge blow at the hands of the Court of Appeal, the second-highest court in England and Wales.

That judicial body ruled that the Islamic marriage contract, known as nikah in Arabic, is not valid under English law.

The report comes from Soeren Kern, a senior fellow at the the Gatestone Institute.

The implications are "far-reaching," Kern reported, because it's a "blow" against the enshrinement of Shariah into the British legal system. But it also leaves possibly "thousands" of Muslim women in Britain without recourse if their relationship with their spouse fails.

The problem came up because Nasreen Akhter and Mohammed Shabaz Khan began a fight.

Both of Pakistani heritage, they "married" under Islam back in 1998. But when Khan allegedly wanted a second wife, Akhter objected.

She filed for divorce and he responded with a lawsuit alleging that they never were married.

The Family Division of the High Court eventually ruled that the marriage was "void."

The other options were "married" and "non-marriage."

But on appeal, the Court of Appeal in London said Islamic marriages are "non-marriages" within the scope of English law, Kern reported.

The decision found: "The court of appeal finds that the December 1998 nikah ceremony did not create a void marriage because it was a non-qualifying ceremony. The parties were not marrying 'under the provisions' of English law (Part II of the Marriage Act 1949). The ceremony was not performed in a registered building. Moreover, no notice had been given to the superintendent registrar, no certificates had been issued, and no registrar or authorized person was present at the ceremony. Further, the parties knew that the ceremony had no legal effect and that they would need to undertake another ceremony that did comply with the relevant requirements in order to be validly married. The determination of whether a marriage is void or not cannot, in the court's view, be dependent on future events, such as the intention to undertake another ceremony or whether there are children."

The opinion pointed out that "it is not difficult for parties who want to be legally married to achieve that status."

Kern reported that the decision presumably will be appealed to the Supreme Court, but in the meantime, advocates for Muslim women warn it is literally taking away any opportunity they have for fairness in the breakup of a marriage.

And he cited a documentary that revealed more than 60% of Muslim woman had not had a civil ceremony to make them legally married under British law.

There already has been a recommendation that Muslim couples be required to have the civil ceremony, but it had not yet been adopted as a regulation.

The Council of Europe also has raised its concerns about the same issue.

The Home Office was terse in its comments about the dispute: "Shariah law does not form any part of the law in England and Wales. Regardless of religious belief, we are all equal before the law. Where Shariah councils exist, they must abide by the law."

The post Appellate court hands big defeat to Shariah activists appeared first on WND.