current | archives | profile | notes | contact | rings | host




Canada �arbitrates� for sharia

September 16, 2004 ~ 1:21 p.m.

It would appear that Canada is having a problem. This is but one tiny example of the dilemma a nation faces when it embraces full multiculturalism. Canada now has to defend its people against the wishes of those who see the chance to stamp their warped version of the law and of society upon a major Western power.

The 1991 Ontario Arbitration Act allows for communities to settle family quarrels according to the tenets and dictates of their faith. However, such proceedings must also respect the laws and human rights of Canadians citizens as defined by their constitution.

The question that Canada�the province of Ontario in particular�must answer is, is sharia consistent with liberal democracy? It would appear that the answer is no. The Muslim Canadian Congress thinks so, arguing that �sharia is flawed because it does not view women as equal and therefore cannot provide equal justice to all parties in a dispute especially on issues of divorce, child custody and division of property.�

I�m no legal scholar, and I�m not pretending to be, but let�s look at the Constitution Act of 1982. In favor of sharia would appear to be:

2. �Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: a) freedom of conscience and religion; b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and d) freedom of association.�

It would appear that freedom of conscience and religion is apropos to the application of sharia.

15. (1) �Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.�

Muslims may be able to state ethnic origin and religion as reasons for backing up sharia.

(2) �Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.�

This is especially germane to point made above. The Muslim community in Canada may try to prove hardship if not allowed to rule their community according to sharia.

26. �The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.�

Clearly, it could be seen that the refusal to allow sharia is the denial of other rights and freedoms.

27. �This Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.�

Speaks for itself.

Now let�s probe those sections of the Constitution Act which would appear to speak against the harsh restraints of sharia:

1. �The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.�

The very first statement of the charter very clearly states �reasonable limits� and �demonstrably justified� with regard to the law and its application for the benefit of a �free and democratic society.� Sharia might well prove to be inconsistent with this.

7. �Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.�

Again, sharia appears to be inconsistent with regard to concerns about one�s rights being deprived.

12. �Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.�

Definitely speaks for itself.

15. (1) �Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.�

Sharia is not concerned about equal rights or equal protection.

24. (1) �Anyone whose rights or freedoms, as guaranteed by this Charter, have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction to obtain such remedy as the court considers appropriate and just in the circumstances.�

How can the allowance for the application of sharia in family disputes as outlined in the Arbitration Act be consistent with any jurisdiction that any court would consider �appropriate and just?�

(2) �Where, in proceedings under subsection (1), a court concludes that evidence was obtained in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter, the evidence shall be excluded if it is established that, having regard to all the circumstances, the admission of it in the proceedings would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.�

It would appear pretty straightforward that the courts could well view any decision made under sharia to have involved evidence obtained �in a manner that infringed or denied any rights or freedoms guaranteed by this Charter.�

26. The guarantee in this Charter of certain rights and freedoms shall not be construed as denying the existence of any other rights or freedoms that exist in Canada.

Such as the right to not have sharia dictating one�s freedoms�or lack thereof.

28. Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.

How, exactly, as the Muslim Canadian Congress points out, is sharia fair to women?

Syed Mumtaz Ali, a lawyer trained in Canada, makes his case for the application of sharia: �This is very basic, fundamental and crucial to Muslims because in a faith-oriented, Islamic way of life, as distinct from a secular way of life, to obey the religious laws in this way is crucial.�

But, on the flipside, Muslim �refusenik� and Canadian citizen Irshad Manji argues in her book �The Trouble with Islam,� that women are subject to a theocratic, male-dominated society that conflicts with the idea of equal rights for both genders. Manji wrote the book as a clarion call for Muslims �to help Islam fulfill its glorious humanitarian potential, so that we all gain in diversity, dignity and security.�

I think Ontario lawmakers are going to be quite busy with this so-called Arbitration Act. Hopefully, blessedly, they will determine that the proposal to incorporate the freedom of application of sharia into it is inconsistent with their nation�s own Constitution act.


Thanks, Hitch!

The estimable Christopher Hitchens has linked to me on his website, or at least those programmers that operate it have.

Cheers!

� M.E.M.

[Sign My Guestbook] [View My Guestbook]
Powered by E-Guestbooks Server.

Copyright � 2001-2007 by M.E. Manning. All material is written by me, unless explicitly stated otherwise by use of footnotes or bylines. Do not copy or redistribute without my permission.

Old Cinders | Fresh Fire

AMERICA FOR TRUE AMERICANS!

-