Archbishop ignites Sharia law row

Religious and secular groups have criticised the Archbishop of Canterbury after he said the adoption of elements of Islamic Sharia law in the UK "seems unavoidable".

Dr Rowan Williams said there was a place for finding a "constructive accommodation" in areas such as marriage - allowing Muslim women to avoid western divorce proceedings.

But his comments have been criticised by Christian and secular groups, while a spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown insisted British law would be based on British values, and sharia law would be no justification for acting against national law.

Mr Brown's spokesman said: "Our general position is that sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breaches of English law, nor should the principles of Sharia law be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes.

"If there are specific instances like stamp duty, where changes can be made in a way that's consistent with British law and British values, in a way to accommodate the values of fundamental Muslims, that is something the Government would look at."

He added: "There is always going to be a debate about this issue.

"In general terms, if there are specific instances that can be looked at on a case-by-case basis, that is something we can look at.

"But the Prime Minister believes British law should apply in this country, based on British values."

Alistair McBay, spokesman for the National Secular Society said: "In a plural society, all citizens are equal under the law and the Archbishop's comments directly undermines this.

"We have segregated schools, segregated scout groups and even segregated toilets for Muslims, and now the Archbishop says we should have different laws, it's madness.

"On the one hand religious groups say they want to integrate, but actually they want to segregate."

Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice said: "This is a Christian country with Christian laws. If Muslims want to live under Sharia law then they are free to emigrate to a country where Sharia law is already in operation.

"Any accommodation with Sharia law does nothing to help social cohesion. Christian law has been eroded by secularism and this country was founded on Christian values."

Dr Williams said other religions enjoyed such tolerance of their own laws, but stressed that it could never be allowed to take precedence over an individual's rights as a citizen.

He said it would also require a change in perception of what Sharia involved beyond the "inhumanity" of extreme punishments and attitudes to women seen in some Islamic states.

Dr Williams told BBC Radio 4's The World At One today: "It seems unavoidable and, as a matter of fact, certain conditions of Sharia are already recognised in our society and under our law, so it is not as if we are bringing in an alien and rival system.

"We already have in this country a number of situations in which the internal law of religious communities is recognised by the law of the land as justifying conscientious objections in certain circumstances."

He added: "There is a place for finding what would be a constructive accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law as we already do with aspects of other kinds of religious law.

"It would be quite wrong to say that we could ever license a system of law for some community which gave people no right of appeal, no way of exercising the rights that are guaranteed to them as citizens in general.

"But there are ways of looking at marital disputes, for example, which provide an alternative to the divorce courts as we understand them.

"In some cultural and religious settings they would seem more appropriate."

There were questions about how it interacted with human rights, he said.

"But I do not think we should instantly spring to the conclusion that the whole of that world of jurisprudence and practice is somehow monstrously incompatible with human rights just because it doesn't immediately fit with how we understand it."

Dr Williams said Orthodox Jewish courts already operated in the UK, and anti-abortion views of Catholics and other Christians were "accommodated within the law".

The Bishop of Rochester, the Rt Rev Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, said last month that non-Muslims faced a hostile reception in places dominated by the ideology of Islamic radicals

Dr Williams said the use of the phrase "no-go areas" had sparked controversy because it reminded people of Northern Ireland.

"I don't think that was at all what was intended; I think it was meant to point to the silo problem, the sense of communities not communicating with each other.

"Many Muslims would say that they feel bits of British society are no-go areas for them."

Mohammed Shafiq, director of the Ramadhan Foundation, welcomed the comments.

"These comments further underline the attempts by both our great faiths to build respect and tolerance.

"Sharia law for civil matters is something which has been introduced in some western countries with much success; I believe that Muslims would take huge comfort from the Government allowing civil matters being resolved according to their faith."

A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said: "Provided an activity prescribed by Sharia law does not contravene the law of England and Wales, there is nothing in English law that prevents people abiding by Sharia law if they wish to do so."

But the spokesman added Sharia law "has no jurisdiction in England and Wales. There is no intention to change this.

"It cannot be used as a justification for committing what is under the law of England and Wales a criminal act."