One of the country’s most high-profile judges has suggested that aspects of Shari’a law could be used to deal with family and marital disputes among British Muslims. Lord Chief Justice, Lord Phillips made the comments as he addressed Muslims at the East London Muslim Centre last week.

He said: “There is no reason why principles of shari’a law, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution.”

Lord Phillips, however, emphasised that both parties to a dispute should agree to the rules and that English law should continue to take precedence.

The judge said there was a lot of misunderstanding about Islamic law: “Part of the misconception about Shari’a law is the belief that Shari’a is only about mandating sanctions such as flogging, stoning, the cutting off of hands, or death for those who fail to comply with the law.”

He continued: “The view of many of Shari’a law is coloured by violent extremists who invoke it, perversely, to justify terrorist atrocities such as suicide bombing, which I understand to be in conflict with Islamic principles.”

Phillips is the most senior judge in England and Wales, and he has been named the inaugural president of the new United Kingdom Supreme Court when it begins operating late next year.

His comments reignited controversial comments made by the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams earlier in the year.

Williams, the titular head of the world’s Anglican (Episcopalian) churches, sparked calls to resign when he said there was a case to be made for finding ‘a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law.’

Last week The Rt Rev John Packer told a debate on the rule of law in the House of Lords that it is important religious communities, including Islam, are ‘not denied the right to uphold ethical and moral standards where they do not infringe basic human rights.’

Lord Phillips defended the comments of the Archbishop of Canterbury by saying the British media has misunderstood what Williams was trying to say: “A point that the archbishop was making was that it was possible for individuals voluntarily to conduct their lives in accordance with Shari’a principles without this being in conflict with the rights guaranteed by our law,”

Lawyers, rights groups, politicians and editorialists responded to Phillips' comments, with many voicing concern about the potential implications for community cohesion and inter-communal relations.

In the Muslim community itself, reaction was mixed.

The Muslim Council of Britain, the country's leading umbrella body for Muslim organizations, said it welcomed Phillips’ ‘call for Muslims to be allowed to apply elements of Islamic law to the governance of personal relationships where this does not conflict with the laws of the land.’

The council's secretary-general, Dr. Abdul Bari, appealed for a thoughtful debate on the issue, devoid of what the organization called ‘hysterical overreaction and misrepresentation.’

British Muslims for Secular Democracy, a group launched earlier this year as a platform for diverse, alternative Muslim views, said a move in the direction suggested by Phillips ‘would be detrimental to Muslims and to society as a whole.’

The organisation pointed out that there are major differences over interpreting and implementing Shari’a among various Islamic schools of thought, and said British Muslims also hold diverse views based on factors including their geographic and ethnic backgrounds.

Shamim Qureshi, the presiding judge of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, said the application of Shari’a law could be useful in settling disputes about forced marriages. Qureshi, a judge in Wolverhampton Magistrates Court, is one of the few Muslims to serve as a judge in England.

09/07/08