Ontario bans religious arbitration: implications for JWs

by kid-A 8 Replies latest jw friends

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    Ontario has banned binding religious arbitration. Logically, this should include the JWs handling divorce matters (where they claim they have the authority to grant "scriptural divorce" and use this to control the future marriages of legally divorced JWs.)

    But, I can also see this law trickling down to the blood issue and child molestation 2 witness policy. Basically, the law attempts to remove all "religious" legal arbitration that may affect the lives of secular citizens belonging to such organizations. Definitely a step in the right direction and I will be interested to see its implications on the "Watchtower Legal System" Ontario bans binding religious arbitration Province bans binding religious arbitration Fear of Muslim sharia spurred protests, action Feb. 15, 2006. 04:57 AM KERRY GILLESPIE QUEEN'S PARK BUREAU The provincial government passed legislation last night that bans the use of binding religious arbitration to settle family law matters, like divorce and child custody.

    "The bill reaffirms the principle that there ought to be one law for all Ontarians," said Attorney General Michael Bryant.

    Women's groups, which say religious arbitration discriminates against women and children, are thrilled.

    Others aren't.

    "It assumes that women are incapable of consenting genuinely to have an arbitration based on their own religious values and that those religious values are innately exploitative," Mark Freiman, of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Ontario Region said.

    The legislation also won't protect vulnerable women who may be forced by their families into seeking a religious settlement rather than going to the public courts, Freiman said.

    Mohamed Elmasry, chair of the Canadian Islamic Congress agrees with him.

    "It will not solve the main problem it is supposed to address, which is to protect women and, basically, it will drive religious arbitration underground," Elmasry said, adding the government should have properly regulated religious arbitration instead of banning it.

    The possibility that a controversial set of Muslim rules and guidelines known as sharia would be used in Ontario under the arbitration act drove the government to draft the new legislation.

    The original arbitration act allowed for just about any set of rules to be used for an arbitration as long as both parties agreed.

    There are many different interpretations of sharia, but most people say it favours fathers for custody of children and men over women in matters of divorce and inheritance.

    "I'm so happy," Homa Arjomand, repeated over and over last night when she heard the government was passing Bill 27 — an act to amend the Arbitration Act, 1991.

    Arjomand, co-ordinator of the International Campaign against Sharia Court in Canada, brought hundreds of protestors to the front lawn of Queen's Park last year to force the government to act.

    Community groups will now have to work hard to make sure religious arbitration doesn't go underground, but even if some does, the decisions will have no legal standing, she said.

    While religious arbitration got everyone's attention — the bulk of family arbitration in the province is being carried out under regular Ontario family law.

    While drafting legislation to protect vulnerable religious women the government came close to destroying the entire system — which is a popular alternative to the expensive and over burdened court system.

    The government made several amendments to the bill after family lawyers and arbitrators pleaded with them during committee hearings.

    Bryant said the legislation was all about finding "the right balance" between competing interests.

    "We've made improvements that I think will ensure that those who could be in a vulnerable position are protected," Bryant said.

    Detailed regulations still have to be drafted, which could take a year, before the changes come into effect, he said.

    Changes include:

  • Only Ontario family law can be used in binding arbitrations.

  • Family law arbitrators will have to be members of a professional arbitration organization and trained to see the signs of domestic violence.

  • Both sides must receive independent legal advice before entering an arbitration agreement.

  • Arbitration decisions can always be appealed to courts.

  • The government will now keep records of arbitrations.

    With files by Robert Benzie

  • DannyHaszard
    DannyHaszard

    Thanks for posting

  • Midget-Sasquatch
    Midget-Sasquatch

    How much of an impact will this really have? The Witnesses always had to go through the law to get their legal divorces, whether or not it was "scripturally" permitted. As far as I can gather, this new ban doesn't mean that the Society will have to allow marriages in their own kingdom halls of those who got "unscripturally" divorced. So whats the difference? How much of an issue is this anyway? Cuz from what I see most of the time people are splitting up after finding out that one or both of them were having affairs.

  • kwintestal
    kwintestal

    I don't see this being as big of a deal for the JW's as it would for other religions, but I must say good job to the Ontario government for passing it!

    I think some people see this type of law passed, and think that JW's will no longer be allowed to conduct Judicial Committee hearings into cases of "wrong-doing", however that is false. They still will be. What this law has done is remove the provision for church groups to handle legal issues, such as divorce and so on and make the rulings of the church group binding. Binding is the key word there. Churches will still have the ability to handle simple legal issues, such as divorce and dividing of assets, however any party involved will have the option to opt out, at any time.

    I believe the main reason for this law being passed is due to the fact that within some cultures and religions, some individuals, specifically women, have less rights, or no rights in some cases, in comparison to men. How can a woman with no rights within a church get a fair deal from the church who is legally representing her. The fear is that she won't, therefore this law.

    Kwin

  • hamsterbait
    hamsterbait

    On the shunning issue it could have legal ramifications.

    Now a DF could go to court citing the shunning as harassment under secular law, and the witlesses have no religious autonomy cop-out.

    The secular law will protect members from harmful actions decided upon by a religious court.

    HB

  • kid-A
    kid-A

    Family law arbitrators will have to be members of a professional arbitration organization and trained to see the signs of domestic violence.

    This alone has implications. I know of a case where a JW woman was being severely beaten by her "JW" husband. She didnt want to leave the borg, and they would

    not give her a "scriptural divorce" and therefore would not recognize the legal divorce. She was threatened with DFing if she re-married or started dating other people.

    Now, I really think actions like that could easily be challenged under this law.

  • Midget-Sasquatch
    Midget-Sasquatch

    This alone has implications. I know of a case where a JW woman was being severely beaten by her "JW" husband. She didnt want to leave the borg, and they would not give her a "scriptural divorce" and therefore would not recognize the legal divorce. She was threatened with DFing if she re-married or started dating other people.

    Now, I really think actions like that could easily be challenged under this law.

    The elders aren't dividing anything up among the mates. That was always done by a court of law. I don't see how being disfellowshipped is something which this law can block. I know the law is about protecting the person from harmful religious rulings. But I don't think it means that this law can force any religion to keep any particular person as its member.

  • Think
    Think

    This is a good one. We know that JW marriages are in deep, deep troubles, and JWCULT has many, many divorces, but because they marry and divorce in the cult by the elders, there are no statiscic available, this is another dirty secret. BUT..........

    The Hammer of Judgment is comming down....

    Rev 18:3-5

  • Scully
    Scully
    Ontario has banned binding religious arbitration. Logically, this should include the JWs handling divorce matters (where they claim they have the authority to grant "scriptural divorce" and use this to control the future marriages of legally divorced JWs.)

    But, I can also see this law trickling down to the blood issue and child molestation 2 witness policy. Basically, the law attempts to remove all "religious" legal arbitration that may affect the lives of secular citizens belonging to such organizations. Definitely a step in the right direction and I will be interested to see its implications on the "Watchtower Legal System"

    I think it may also have a huge bearing on judicial actions like disfellowshipping and disassociation. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms allows for the free association of individuals and freedom of worship. By shunning people who are DFd or DAd, the WTS interferes with the freedom one has to associate freely with family and/or friends, and also interferes with a person's choice to worship as they feel motivated to worship (or not).

  • Share this

    Google+
    Pinterest
    Reddit