ONE of the nation's top Muslim leaders, Sheik Mohamadu Nawas Saleem, has supported a plan to introduce sharia law in Australia, saying it could operate in the family law system through a new model of Islamic arbitration.
But Attorney-General Robert McClelland yesterday killed off any calls for sharia law in Australia, saying there was no place for it in the Gillard government's debate about multicultural policy.
In its submission to the parliamentary inquiry into the policy, the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils called for Muslims to be offered "legal pluralism".
But Mr McClelland said there was no place for sharia law in Australian society, and the government strongly rejected any proposal for its introduction.
"As our citizenship pledge makes clear, coming to Australia means obeying Australian laws and upholding Australian values," he said. "Australia's brand of multiculturalism promotes integration. If there is any inconsistency between cultural values and the rule of law, then Australian law wins out."
We were blessed to live in a stable democracy underpinned by the rule of law, he said. "People who migrate to Australia do so because of the fact we have a free, open and tolerant society where men and women are equal before the law irrespective of race, religious or cultural background.
"Indeed, all applicants for citizenship swear collective allegiance to the people of Australia, and undertake to respect our customs and abide by our laws. The values underpinning those principles will not be changing."
Sheik Nawas, a sharia expert and member of the Australian National Council of Imams and the imam of a mosque in the Melbourne suburb of Hoppers Crossing, told The Australian he backed an Islamic tribunal or arbitration option that worked with the Family Court to settle disputes.
"In the area of divorce, there has been a demand for a long time that religious divorce should be recognised. That could be accommodated under the Family Law Act, where there are provisions for arbitration," he said.
"Islamic arbitration could harmonise sharia law into the Australian law. We would keep the Australian divorce laws, but at the same time accommodate the religious part of it. Going to the Federal Court and getting a divorce is not good enough.
"It doesn't break the sharia part of the relationship."
Mr McClelland's comments follow a submission from the AFIC to the parliamentary inquiry, arguing that Muslims should enjoy "legal pluralism".
Labor MP Maria Vamvakinou, who holds a seat in Melbourne's west and is chairing the parliamentary inquiry into multi-culturalism, said sharia law had every right to be part of the debate.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nationa ... 6057823890
Aus says no to Sharia law
Aus says no to Sharia law
“If you trust in yourself, and believe in your dreams, and follow your star. . . you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy.”
Re: Aus says no to Sharia law
It is difficult enough to incorporate Aboriginal Customary Law into our legal system, let alone Sharia Law.
Bah!


Re: Aus says no to Sharia law
There is no place in family law for systems of arbitration that do not recognize the equality of husband and wife before the law. That applies as much to sharia law as it does to rabbinical courts, which I am willing to bet are recognized under arbitration law in Australia as they are in the U.K, Canada and other common law countries. There have been any number of cases here in Ontario where Jewish men have used their ability to refuse to grant their wives a religious divorce as a means of blackmailing them into accepting a smaller financial settlement than that to which they would otherwise be entitled under secular law. Even where such sexual inequality does not exist, the recourse to religious courts has been a problem, as for example in Roman Catholic chancery courts where one spouse threatens to oppose the application for an annulment in order to secure a more favorable financial or custody agreement. The two processes need to keep completely separate in the area of family law. But there is no reason to refuse the use of religious courts, sharia or otherwise, as a means of binding arbitration in business disputes, for example, where both parties are seen as equals.
"The dildo of consequence rarely comes lubed." -- Eileen Rose