One Law for All
There have been two recent stories which have grabbed both attention and headlines. Both relate to the application in November 2007 of Sharia law or its effective equivalent, one in the Sudan, one in Saudi Arabia. Both these countries apply such law.
Virtually no one who has not been in seclusion can be unaware of the story of teacher Gillian Gibbons. Were her story not so outrageous and tragic one would be inclined to assume it must be a spoof dreamed up by one of the more imaginative writers of Private Eye. She taught at a school in the Sudan and sought suggestions from her (Muslim) seven-year-old pupils as to the name for the class teddy bear. The popular demand was that it be named Mohammed. That is what the teddy bear was called, but then in consequence she was prosecuted and convicted for insulting Islam. Following this she received a sentence of 15 days in prison. (Mercifully the flogging to which she might have been subject was not included). The conviction and sentence was universally condemned in the UK (including by certain Muslim leaders). She was to serve her sentence in a jail at Omdurman (famous for being the site of the last old-style cavalry charge in 1895, in which Winston Churchill participated), a jail built to house a couple of hundred presently housing 1500. Bizarrely this sentence was not enough for the fanatics. Thousands of armed militants marched through Khartoum demanding her execution. As a result, for her protection she was moved elsewhere, before being pardoned part way through her sentence as a result of strenuous efforts on her behalf. These included in particular efforts by Muslim peers.
This follows hot on the heels of a 19-year-old Saudi woman being sentenced to 200 lashes and six months in prison for illegally being with a man (not her husband or a relative). The man and woman were attacked by a gang of men and she was gang raped 14 times. The rapists received sentence of between 10 months and 5 years. It defies belief that any legal system could in those circumstances possibly contemplate imposing any penalty upon the victim of rape, let alone flogging and imprisonment.
Sharia law is based upon the Koran, the Hadith (which sets out certain deeds and words of Mohammed) and very early Islamic judicial rulings. It was settled by about the millennium (not the last one, the one before). At that time Western Europe had some pretty unusual legal traditions (trial by ordeal, trial by battle etc) but no one suggests they should be applied today.
However only last year an ICM opinion poll showed that 40% of British Muslims thought that sharia law should be introduced in "predominantly Muslim areas". (41% opposed this). 40% cannot be regarded as anything other than a substantial proportion, especially when the competing viewpoints were effectively "neck and neck". Since they must be aware of what sharia law entails, that would mean that such law would be imposed upon anyone in such areas (however they were defined). Whilst I am sure it is inconceivable to most people that this could ever happen or be permitted or treated as a serious suggestion, that was obviously not the viewpoint of a large number of people interviewed.
Those percentages no doubt reflect a persistent failure of society as a whole to support Muslim moderates at the same time as rooting out extremists. Whether that is correct or not, now would be a salutary time for all the mainstream political parties to make one thing abundantly clear. Sharia law can never and should never be introduced into any part of the United Kingdom, at any stage, ever. It is better that everyone knows where they stand on this issue because then it is less likely that misunderstandings lead to greater problems later on. Freedoms and laws in this country should apply to all citizens of whatever religion, and in all parts of the country. There must always be one law for all. That law will not be, and should not be, Sharia law.