Religious tribunals to be outlawed in Ontario - Premier

by Scully 26 Replies latest social current

  • Scully
    Scully

    Sharia Law Outlawed in Ontario - Globe and Mail

    McGuinty government rules out use of sharia law

    By COLIN FREEZE AND KAREN HOWLETT
    Monday, September 12, 2005 Updated at 5:11 AM EDT From Monday's Globe and Mail

    Toronto — Seeking to end months of debate, Premier Dalton McGuinty now says "there will be no sharia law in Ontario" -- an announcement that should quell a growing public-relations crisis concerning the use of Islamic law, but which also exposes Queen's Park to attacks from other religions.

    Following widespread condemnation of a plan that would formally allow the tenets of sharia to be used in resolving family disputes, the Premier said he'll make the boundaries between church and state clearer by banning faith-based arbitrations.

    Ontario explicitly gave the green light to such practices in its 1991 Arbitration Act. But as early as this fall, new Ontario laws may put a stop to religion-based settlements in matters such as child-custody disputes or inheritances.

    This means that orthodox Jews and some Christian leaders may soon make a common cause with fundamentalist Muslims in seeking to limit the scope of the new proposals.

    "Our reaction is we're disappointed, we're very disappointed," said Joel Richler, chairman of the Ontario wing of the Canadian Jewish Congress.

    "It's what we consider to be a knee-jerk reaction against the sharia issue."

    He said orthodox Jews have used tribunals to settle family disputes for centuries, but the future of these tribunals is no longer clear in Ontario.

    Many moderate Muslims say they are overjoyed by the Premier's announcement.

    "I'm so happy today. It's a victory for the women's rights movement," said Homa Arjomand, an Iranian immigrant who has launched a campaign to stop sharia in Ontario.

    "Women's rights are not protected by any religion," she said.

    But fundamentalist Islam, in particular, can be harsh, she said.

    "Divorces are happening behind closed doors and the woman is banned from having custody of her children," Ms. Arjomand said. "She is being sent back to her home country to live with her relatives."

    She went so far as to say that proposed new laws ought to allow for the prosecution of religious leaders involved in faith-based arbitrations.

    While it's unlikely that amendments to the Arbitration Act will go that far, Mr. McGuinty told The Canadian Press yesterday that "I've come to the conclusion that the debate has gone on long enough. There will be no sharia law in Ontario."

    "There will be no religious arbitration in Ontario," he said. "There will be one law for all Ontarians."

    Legislation will be introduced "as soon as possible," he said.

    The 1991 legislation was originally hailed as a victory for multiculturalism, but since then Canada's Muslim population has grown considerably and now numbers around 650,000.

    Already imams are using Islamic law to help settle family disputes -- and will likely continue to do so regardless of what Ontario does.

    But outspoken opponents of sharia fear that well-intentioned politicians seeking to steer family feuds away from courtrooms will, through religious arbitration, end up ensconcing outposts of fundamentalism in the West. "It's happening in England, it's happening in Sweden," Ms. Arjomand said.

    Last year, former NDP attorney-general Marion Boyd recommended the province handle Islamic arbitrations as it long has other religious arbitrations. She said participants must go into the process voluntarily, and that all decisions could be appealed in court.

    Yet the proposal is exceptionally controversial. In the past week alone, there have been a series of marches against sharia and reports of female Ontario Liberal MPPs denouncing the initiative. This past weekend an open letter from prominent Canadian women urged Mr. McGuinty to take a stand against "the ghettoization of members of religious communities as well as human-rights abuses" that religious tribunals would bring.

    Many observers said the Premier's means of pulling the plug on sharia, by talking to one news agency on a Sunday afternoon, was a curious way to go about ending a debate that has raged for months.

    "By letting it go on, and suddenly ending it mysteriously on a Sunday afternoon, is not probably the best kind of leadership that one could show," Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory told The Canadian Press.

    Government sources told The Globe that Liberal MPPs have been inundated with telephone calls in recent days from their constituents, expressing concern that Ontario could become the first Western jurisdiction to permit Islamic law to be used in family arbitration cases.

  • Scully
    Scully
    the Premier said he'll make the boundaries between church and state clearer by banning faith-based arbitrations.

    Ontario explicitly gave the green light to such practices in its 1991 Arbitration Act. But as early as this fall, new Ontario laws may put a stop to religion-based settlements in matters such as child-custody disputes or inheritances.

    "Women's rights are not protected by any religion," she said.
    She went so far as to say that proposed new laws ought to allow for the prosecution of religious leaders involved in faith-based arbitrations.

    I wonder how this will impact the JWs and their Judicial Committees..... Wouldn't it be awesome if these new laws effectively nullified any religious based rulings against people?

    I wonder whether the JWs would comply with these laws?

  • Scully
    Scully

    The same story, from Yahoo News:

    Atwood, Barlow, Callwood add names to protest against Shariah law

    Sun Sep 11, 8:51 PM ET

    TORONTO (CP) - A group including author Margaret Atwood, and activists Maude Barlow, June Callwood and Shirley Douglas have joined the No Religious Arbitration Coalition in protesting the use of Shariah law in Ontario.

    In an open letter to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, the group said the protest is not just about Muslim Shariah law, but the issue of keeping religious matters separate from the business of the state.

    "Religion should simply remain an important part of the lives of citizens but not of public law," the letter states.

    "Surely the separation of church and state is understood by today's politicians to be the fertile ground upon which modern, rights-based democracies such as that in Canada have flourished."

    Marion Boyd, a former Ontario attorney general, has recommended changing the province's 14-year-old arbitration act to continue permitting religious arbitration, but with new oversight mechanisms and safeguards.

    The act allows civil disputes ranging from child custody and support to divorce and inheritance to be resolved through an independent arbitrator if both parties agree.

    McGuinty rejected the possibility of allowing Shariah law Sunday, saying religious arbitrations "threaten our common ground."

    He promised that his Liberal government would move quickly to outlaw all existing religious tribunals.

    Catholics, Mennonites, Jews, aboriginals, Jehovah's Witnesses and Muslims, among others, have used the act to settle family law questions without resorting to the courts.

    Opponents of permitting Shariah family arbitration, including vocal Muslim women's groups, argue the reforms would give legitimacy and an unenforceable appearance of oversight to Shariah, a legal code they say is profoundly inequitable to women.

    "Allowing the use of religious arbitration will lead to divisiveness, the ghettoization of members of religious communities as well as human-rights abuses, particularly for those who hold the least institutional power within the community, namely women and children," the letter reads.

    Retired politician Flora MacDonald, actress Sonja Smits and Maureen McTeer, wife of former prime minister Joe Clark, were also among those who signed the letter.

    Copyright © 2005 Canadian Press

    Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy - Terms of Service
    Question? Comments? Send us feedback.
  • talesin
    talesin

    Scully, this is what I expected would happen. About 6 months ago, I saw a doc on CBC and it clearly showed that the majority of folks within the muslim community were against sharia. They were gathering celebrity help at that point, and who better than Atwood et al? I've seen Douglas when she came here to speak on health care, and she is powerful. I didn't comment on Mary's thread (not that I remember ;D), but read it with interest.

    I feel that separation of religion and state should be complete. It is one of the few areas where I lean toward black-and-white thinking. Well, maybe that is because it is just wrong.

    tal

  • Smiles
    Smiles

    Interesting topic Scully. I'm sure the WT will file a lawsuit.

  • talesin
    talesin


    Smiles, agreed. Or they may sign on as a 'friend' of the plaintiff when the Muslim sharia proponents file. Either way, it's likely they will be involved.

  • blondie
    blondie

    I wonder how this will affect the WTS not reporting illegal immigrant JWs, murderers, JWs who have cheated other JWs financially, etc.

    Since adultery may not be against secular law, I wonder though how that will affect JCs?

    Blondie (this opens up an interesting can of worms)

  • Scully
    Scully
    Since adultery may not be against secular law, I wonder though how that will affect JCs?

    Exactly. Neither is fornication against secular law, nor smoking, for that matter.

    Child molestation IS against the law though.

    It may be that Elders™ will now have more time for Shepherding™ the congregation and less time for Judging™ them.

  • Satanus
    Satanus

    "There will be one law for all Ontarians."
    Which is as it should be. Why should jews and religions that sprang from them have other binding laws than what the common people do? Extra laws should be purely voluntary, free to be renounced at any time, without reprisal. That's freedom of religion.

    S

  • Will Power
    Will Power

    I hope it goes to a vote - and all those "who are no part of this world" will not get to vote, because their voices have been silenced by their religious tribunal.

    wp

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit