In
the bigger context of 'state terrorism' and all the issues that
are inherently tied to it -- in particular, Islamophobia
(something the left and right can succumb to) -- the topic of
Sharia Law should not lose its relevance.
Charles Demers made an interesting point regarding the framing
of the Shariah law debate that littered the Canadian airwaves
not long ago:
"Democratically-minded Canadians ought certainly to oppose the
introduction of religious courts in this country, but not
primarily because of some abstract allegiance to the concept of
the separation of religion from matters of state. In the face of
a very real and contemporary onslaught on the rights of a
persecuted minority, we ought to insist that the fundamental
egalitarian principles of equality before the law and access to
the courts of the land be upheld, and that no Jim Crow standards
be allowed in our legal system." (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=6230)
In a world that is increasingly hostile to Muslims -- both
knowingly and unknowingly -- many have spoken out against the
implementation of religious courts in Canada which have long
since been in existence before. Demers provides a different
outlook from the usual and biased attacks based on the
atheistic-fundamentalist principle of "separation between church
and state". Demers took into account the very real onslaught on
the Muslim community and the threat of turning the Muslim
community into second and third tier citizens. Of course, these
are all viable fears that cannot be ignored. There should be
careful attention given to the application of such things and to
ensure that they are properly implemented.
All of that said, there are important principles to take into
account:
i.
There is diversity in the Muslim community as to how it
perceives Shariah Law.
ii. Non-Muslims and Muslims alike should have trust on the
proponents of Shariah Law -- primarily, on traditional and
orthodox Muslims -- in that they know what is best for their
own community of believers and that they will implement it in
the best and most just of manners.
iii. That a formal legal/contractual agreement has been made
between all parties before it can be implemented.
iv. The universal principle of: "Applying to yourself, what
you apply to others."
v. The issue of religious respect.
As it relates to Article I, Demers is quite aware that there is
diversity in the Muslim community in how Shariah Law is
perceived. Nevertheless, there are specific issues -- much of
which are well-known, controversial and are quite numerous --
within Shariah Law that even traditional and orthodox Muslims
are in argument about.
Consequently, as for the second one, there is clearly no element
of trust being displayed toward Muslims who want the
implementation of Shariah Law. Upon mention of the word 'Shariah',
there is already a clear and apparent bias towards it, without
the slightest consideration from both people in the left and
right. There is a patronizing attitude falsely proclaiming that
'these Muslims' are inherently incapable of knowing what is best
for them and that they will not resist if the laws they want are
unjustly implemented.
Thirdly, there is the issue of people willingly and
democratically wanting to live under such laws. Everyone has the
free will to sign a contractual agreement that will bind them to
a body of law; no one will be forced to live under it -- Muslims
or non-Muslims alike, as this would be a direct violation of the
fourth principle: "Applying to yourself, what you apply to
others." Consequently, violating this universal principle is in
total contradiction to the message of Islam.
Lastly, there is the issue of religious respect which requires
all citizens to be accommodated as much as possible so that they
can live their religious beliefs to the fullest. In this matter,
people from both the left and right are inherently disrespecting
what the majority of Muslims believe: Shariah Law is a part of
Islam and cannot be put aside as irrelevant by devout Muslims.
Thus, Shariah Law becomes a human rights issue and must be
considered as a fundamental right of Muslims who believe in it.
It is an issue of religious respect and accommodation.
In short, respect in principle, the decision of a majority of
Muslims to live under Shariah Law because it is an inseparable
part of their belief system and an optimal means of
self-expression and self-representation. Consequently, these
Muslims should be given the benefit of the doubt, in that they
know best how to apply their laws in the most effective, just
and self-preserving manner to themselves. We should not be
patronizing the beliefs of people if these beliefs do not
violate any of the principles that have already been
highlighted. Most importantly, we should not patronize the
concerns of such individuals pertaining to issues of social
justice. You will find that a large majority of Muslims, who
argue in favor of Shariah, have the deepest concern about it.
All of these principles need to be taken into account as a
whole. One cannot simply apply one principle in isolation. Of
course, beyond these generalities and principles, we turn to
specific issues and arguments. Before we can move ahead and deal
with those, we need to accept these aforementioned universal
principles.
Shariah
Law: Creating a New