Sharia or Islamic law cannot trump the fundamental principles of English law even if the Archbishop of Canterbury wants to adopt some of its aspects, lawyers say.

Muslims can already decide to have disputes settled according to Sharia in private arbitration, but they cannot ignore or abandon the basic human rights and responsibilities entrenched in the laws of this country, the lawyers said. They also gave warning that moves towards recognising aspects of Sharia could lead to a dual legal system.

But the Archbishop of Canterbury’s remarks could pave the way to recognition of Sharia Councils, local groups set up to advise Muslims on matrimonial and other problems and mediate, in the way that the Beth Din, the Jewish Court, arbitrates certain disputes between Orthodox Jews.

Another possible impact of his comments might be to allow Muslim marriages to be recognised, without requiring couples to have a civil Register Office ceremony.

Does Islam fit with our law?

Is a clash of civilisations looming? It’s now time to find the links rather than the conflicts between English and Islamic law

David Pannick, QC, one of Britain’s top human rights and public law barristers, said: “If the Archibishop of Canterbury means that Muslims can choose to have certain disputes settled according to their own law, by binding arbitration [what some call a Sharia court], then they can do this now, in the same way that some Jewish people have their disputes settled in the Beth Din.

“But such transfer of jurisdiction is subject to public policy considerations. That means that the fundamental standards of fairness, of human rights which underpin our laws cannot be abrogated. They can’t just be ditched, whether a person is male, female, black or white. If the Archibishop is saying this, then that is fundamentally wrong.”

Matters of criminal law, for instance, could not be adjudicated privately, he said. Nor could marriages under UK law be dissolved under Sharia law. “That would lead to the breakdown of society, if some groups of people could just ignore laws that applied to others.

“But if Muslims want to have a commercial or family dispute resolved by private arbitration, that can already be done.”

Gerald Butler, QC, a retired senior circuit judge, said: “I am not clear what the Archbishop is saying. Is he suggesting two parallel legal systems — and if so, why not for the Hindus or the Jews? It’s the strangest thing I’ve ever heard.”

He added: “There’s nothing wrong with two Muslims voluntarily agreeing to have a dispute settled privately by arbitration under Sharia, but of course, if there was a problem over payment or enforcing the agreement, it would have to come back to our courts — even though their methods of enforcement might be rather more effective.”

Ian Edge, director of the Centre of Islamic and Middle East Law (CIMEL), said that he would want to study what the Archbishop had said before commenting. But in general, there was a debate to be had over whether — for instance — Sharia Councils should be recognised.

“At present these are not formalised and not even recognised by some Muslims. But if they were unified as is the Beth Din, the Jewish Court, then there may be an argument for recognising that they can resolve certain disputes within the Islamic community.”

He added that there was also a strong case for giving recognising as valid a Muslim marriage ceremony, without requiring a civil Register Office ceremony to take place.

“Muslims are disadvantaged in this respect in a way that Anglicans, Quakers, Jews, Catholics, are not,“ he said.

“The result of this is that sometimes such marriages take place outside the law entirely, which can leave women, for instance, at a disadvantage. So there is a case for bringing Muslims within English law by recognising their marriages.”

Jeremy Rosenblatt, a barrister specialising in international child law, said: “If the Archbishop is merely talking about giving some recognition to Sharia marriage or divorce — but excluding the allowing of multiple wives — then that is one thing.”

The Jewish “get”, the orthodox divorce, was incoporated into the law in this country in the sense that if a husband refused to grant it to his wife then she could refuse him a decree absolute, he said. “But if we are talking about recognising aspects of Shaira that allow for multiple wives, for example, that is very concerning.”

Explore Law

• Corporate Law

• Public Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Student Law

• Law Reports

Times Recommends

• Are top lawyers worth their huge fees?
• Solicitor forced to retire claims 'ageism'
• Drug case failure may be last straw for SFO