A Critical Analysis of Islamic Council of Europe: From a Juristical and Islamic Legal Maxim Perspective

Abstract

Muslims living in England are living in a predicament. On the one
hand, they have to face the reality that the laws governing the family institution
are secular in nature. This poses a threat to their identity and freedom of
religion. On the other hand, they are commanded by Islam to settle their
disputes according to its laws and principles. However, this is unrealistic,
simply due to the fact that the only recognized legal system in England is
the English Law. To circumvent this situation, certain Muslim scholars and
communities have established quasi-judicial courts, acting in the capacity of
mediators, counsellors, arbitrators and even judges, in order to settle marital
disputes. These courts, known as Shariah councils, provide a modern approach
to alternative dispute resolution, whereby Muslim families and individuals
can have their disputes resolved amicably. It was also set up as a response for
Muslims to adapt to life under the English secular laws in which they live in,
that do not afford them the right of having a Sharʑah-based institution. One
such Shariah council offering a modern approach to settling marital disputes
amicably is the Islamic Council of Europe. The researcher conducted an
in-depth interview with the said council and was able to collect a couple of
arbitrational cases and analysed them in order to give a better understanding
into its inner workings, its structural set-up and operation. Hence, this paper
aims to critically and juristically analyse them from an Islamic legal maxim
perspective while taking the Muslim minority context into consideration.