Input your search keywords and press Enter.
Sharia
/ʃəˈriːə/ (Anglicised) or [ʃaˈriːʕa] (Arabic)
OED Definition:
The Islamic religious law, including the teachings of the Qur’an and the traditional sayings of Muhammad.
Variants: Shariah, Shari’a, Shari’ah.
Term Variants: Shariah
How this term should be used
The term Sharia should only be used when genuinely relevant, and when used, it should be used in its broadest sense to refer to the aspiration of Muslims to live their lives in accordance with God’s wishes.
It is inconsistent to use the term “Sharia law” when referring to a harsh penal code, but not when referring to other aspects of Sharia, such as charity, being good to one’s neighbour or even rituals such as fasting.
The usage of the phrase “according to Sharia law” should always be carefully caveated to reflect the diversity of Muslim opinion.
Terms such as “Sharia marriage”, or “Sharia law husband” to refer to a religious wedding that was not registered in British law, should be avoided, given their lack of clarity and how they are likely to be misunderstood.
The term “Sharia court” used with “judges” should be avoided and replaced with “Sharia council” and “Islamic scholars” or “mediators”, given their role is limited to specific issues (often marriage and divorce), subordinate to the court system and limited to arbitration with agreement from all impacted parties.
The term Sharia literally means “the way” or “the path” in Arabic.
The divine Sharia could be understood as the theoretical path of perfection that Muslims should aspire to, in order to live their lives in accordance to God’s wishes. In order to best understand God’s wishes, Muslim scholars have laid out their understanding of the legal aspects of Sharia in jurisprudential (fiqh) rulings for Muslims to follow.
On some issues, there is consensus or near-consensus amongst traditional scholars; on other issues, there is a great diversity of opinion. As such, it is not always reasonable to categorically know what is right “according to Sharia”, and instead, there are often caveats introduced such as discussing a ruling “according to a specific scholar in a specific school of thought”.
Muslims will differ in how holistically they rely on scholars and an understanding of the Sharia, to drive their daily life. For some, Sharia will define and inform every aspect of their lives; and for others, it may be specifically used in reference to actions of worship, such as praying, fasting, giving charity and going to the religious pilgrimage (Hajj or Umrah). There are also some Muslims, whose understanding of Islam and the Sharia, may not come from traditional scholarship.
Some Muslim-majority states explicitly refer to laws being in line with the Sharia either across the board, or specifically for particular areas of life. However, it is rare that traditional scholars are involved in the formation or have a veto to prevent laws from being enacted.
Within non-Muslim discourse in the public, the most common uses of Sharia are in reference to:
- Harsh punishments in the penal code e.g. adultery laws, cutting of the hand etc.
- Ordinary actions performed differently by Muslims e.g. marriage, divorce, financial products etc.
- Restrictions specific to Muslims e.g. the banning of alcohol
- Sharia councils
Given Sharia has historically been used in Western media to refer to harsh penal punishments, the term “Sharia” has become synonymous with the idea of a fear-inducing alien system that stands in opposition to British law and Western values and as a means by which Muslims take over. The corollary to this, is that Muslims who adhere to the Sharia in whatever guise, are deemed as a threat and seen as the “other”, even if their adherence to Sharia, is, for example, limited to rituals which have no bearing on British law.
When Sharia councils are referred to as “courts” with “judges”, it reinforces the dangerous trope that Muslims in the UK have established a parallel legal system that is incompatible with the law of the land. This aligns with findings of the independent review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales, which found that:
It is this misrepresentation of sharia councils as courts that leads to public misconceptions over the primacy of sharia over domestic law. [1]
The Independent Review attributed this faulty categorisation both to the media and to certain Sharia Councils. Sharia law has never had any legal status in England and Wales and that it is illegal for a Sharia Council to make any sort of judgment that is incompatible with or contrary to the existing legal code.
Usage in Context
Source Information:
|
Excerpt:
“Man, 21, accused of stabbing woman, 22, and her mother, 49, to death is her SHARIA LAW HUSBAND as he appears in court on murder charges after victims were heard ‘screaming like animals.”
The usage of “Sharia law” in “Sharia law husband” appears to be because the individual accused of murder, had a religious wedding which was not registered. However, there is no evidence shown on why this is in any way relevant to the murder.
Huffington Post headlined their story. “Solihull Murders: Man Charged Over The Death Of Mother And Daughter.” The Telegraph went with: “Janbaz Tarin charged with Solihull murders of Raneem Oudeh and her mother Khaola Saleem”. The Times newspaper led with: “Man charged over deaths of mother and daughter in Solihull”. The Evening Standard decided on: “Solihull murder probe: Man, 21, arrested over double stabbing of mother and daughter.” The Press Association topline was: “Solihull deaths: Janbaz Tarin appears in court charged with murder”.
Local outlets did not seem interested in pursuing the “Sharia husband” angle either. The Stoke Sentinel’s headline reads: “Man, 21, charged with murder after deaths of mother and daughter”. The Shropshire Star led with: “Man charged over death of mother and daughter in Solihull” while the topline in the Yeovil Express was, “Man accused of double murder to appear in court.” The Solihull Observer, which was arguably closest to the incident, made the decision to go with: “Man charged with murdering mum and daughter in Solihull appears in court.”
The Sun Online changed their headline from: “Solihull stabbing accused Janbaz Tarin appears in court charged with killing Sharia law wife and her mum while they ‘screamed like animals’” to “’DOUBLE KILLER’ IN COURT Solihull stabbing accused Janbaz Tarin appears in court charged with killing ex-partner and her mum” and agreed it was “inappropriate terminology” as it “isn’t relevant enough to the story to warrant its use in the headline”.
The Mail Online is inviting the reader to infer that the fact that they were married under Sharia Law is one of the most important parts of the story, more important even than the names of victims, the name of the perpetrator, the location of the crime, and when the attack is said to have taken place.
One possibility of why this title was chosen by the Mail Online, is that linking the murder to Sharia, feeds into a pre-existing narrative of Muslims being more prone to violence, murder and abuse of women, and therefore, is more likely to be shared.
Source Information:
|
Excerpt:
Inside Britain’s secretive sharia courts: Veil is lifted on the religious tribunals where downtrodden women plead with judges to dissolve their marriages
The reporter, David Jones, makes the editorial decision of referring to Sharia Councils as courts, and of referring to those presiding over these councils as “Judges”, reinforcing the narrative that Muslims have established a parallel legal system that is incompatible with the law of the land.
He reinforces the idea that Islam is taking over Britain with unqualified phrases like “What we do know is that sharia courts are proliferating across Britain”, giving credence to the myth that British values are under siege from a foreign, invading culture.
Furthermore, his wording promotes the trope that Sharia Councils are secretive which has been in currency for rather a long time. Here, it is emphasised even though the reporter of the story was granted access to a Sharia Council where he was able to observe hearings on issues of paramount sensitivity. As a Sharia Council does not have any legal authority, it is unrealistic to expect that it should be open to the public in the same way as a court of law. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that when The University of Reading conducted an exploratory study of Sharia Councils in England, 22 of the 30 councils contacted agreed to take part.
The writer, nevertheless, places a great deal of importance on this idea of secrecy, despite there being little reason why the workings of Sharia Councils be understood by more than a few people? Given that their workings are only relevant to Muslims, who make up approximately 6% of the UK’s population, and even then, in a decidedly limited set of circumstances (divorce and some financial matters), the idea that the activities of Sharia Councils ought to be more widely known is unrealistic. How much does the average non-Jew know about the workings of the Beth Din? How much does the average non-Catholic know about the workings of Diocesan Tribunals and the process of obtaining an annulment? In both instances, one would have to actively seek out the information. And the evidence would suggest that in the case of seeking out this information, there is no great resistance on the part of the Sharia Councils to provide it. If there had been, the reporter of the piece would not have been able to attend one, and the University of Reading would not have found that over 70% of councils were willing to cooperate with their study.
| . Source information: .
|
Excerpt:
The new Islamic penal code, or Sharia law, which is to come into force in the tiny southeast Asian sultanate on Wednesday, has already drawn fierce criticism from rights groups and the United Nations.
In this excerpt, the writer uses “Islamic penal code” as a synonym for Sharia. This characterisation is not only inaccurate but also dangerous. “Sharia” is not a penal code. Muslims consider it the divine law of their religion. Therefore, while it is true to say that the Sharia is the authoritative source an interpretation of which is used to develop the penal code of some Muslim majority countries, to refer to it as one and the same thing is to give the impression that Islam is wrong.
