Sharia Law or 'One Law for All'? by MacEoin Denis

Author:MacEoin, Denis [MacEoin, Denis]
Language: eng
Format: mobi, epub
Publisher: Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society
Published: 2009-06-28T16:00:00+00:00

Al-Alwani's mild actions are worthy of being studied in light of his doctrine. The first thing Al-Alwani did was to forward the question to a special committee headed by Shaykh Dr Yousef al-Qaradawi. Al-Qaradawi’s committee gave a ruling allowing the Muslim soldiers ‘to be united against all those who terrorize the innocent’, and on this basis al-Alwani issued a similar ruling for the Muslim troops. The twist in the story happened two weeks later, when in a Friday sermon al-Qaradawi denounced his first ruling.76

What did al-Alwani gain for the Muslim minorities by this controversial move? The answer lies in the question. Almost without noticing, al-Alwani created a factual situation wherein the orders of Muslim soldiers in the US Army are open to question and negotiation. The idea that Muslims who serve in the US army should do it with the consent of foreign Muslim scholars, and according to their conditions, was put on the table. Al-Alwani, through his actions, introduced the reality that the United States Federal Government should no longer automatically take the loyalty of Muslims to the US Army for granted. This should be considered as a great victory for the doctrine of Muslim Minority Jurisprudence, especially since it was achieved without backfire from the Western media.77

Similar issues have been raised about Muslims serving in the British army or police force.

A member of a chatroom run by the Followers of Ahl us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa’ah said joining the British Army or police is ‘clearly haram [forbidden] and a sin.’ One leading member of the group said that anyone who did the following was a non-believer: ‘applying for jobs that are asking Muslims to join the MI5 to infiltrate the community; co-operating with the Government by asking Muslim parents to spy on their children; working with deviant sects who ask us to join the crusading British Army; swearing an oath of allegiance to the fallible Queen’.78

Perhaps the most worrying way in which external judgements may find force within the UK legal system would be in cases involving acts of religious discrimination or, were there to be a future extended law of blasphemy, in cases alleging blasphemous intent by authors, cartoonists or broadcasters. Even where Islamic rulings from British clerics were advanced as ‘evidence’ that a certain book was blasphemous or a specific action discriminatory, it is highly likely that the clerics would have had recourse to external authorities of greater distinction than themselves, to the European Centre for Fatwas and Research or even to al-Azhar University. A British judge or jury could not rule against a Muslim authority (who would be deemed best placed to know what constituted blasphemy or discrimination against Muslims), which would mean that a British court would always be at the mercy of external rulings. In the end, that would expose UK law and UK courts to inappropriate pressure.

In January 2007, Aziz Shaykh, a professor in the Division of Community Health Services at Edinburgh University, published an article in the British Medical Journal79 in which he argued that Muslims must have entirely separate health services from the rest of the community.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.