There is a fear that sharia courts, which have sprouted in mosques, Islamic centers and in schools, would submerge British courts because Muslims would avoid state courts on issues of marriage and divorce.

Muslims who entered an Islamic marriage must also go through a civil ceremony to have their marriage recognized by the state. When they want a divorce, they must secure a civil divorce as well as an Islamic divorce.

The issues of marriage and divorce as practiced by extremist Muslims subjugate women, treating them as second-class citizens. The rules violate the human rights and values of the U.K. Husbands can divorce wives in the presence of two witnesses without going through a formal hearing. Wives then must appeal to the sharia courts for a divorce, and their requests are frequently not granted.

Critics of the Muslim regulations are alarmed at the erosion of the U.K. justice system. They point out that these courts are registered as charities and they qualify for government tax credits. A recent news story describes the frustration of a Muslim lady who had already received a civil divorce from her estranged husband who she has not seen for two years. Meeting with a senior sharia court judge, she wants to know why she must wait three months before she can remarry. He replied "these rulings are all in the Koran. The rulings are made for all." As a devout Muslim, she is obligated to wait for the sharia court to act on her divorce.

This judge advocates that sharia court decisions be recognized in secular courts just as divorce decisions of the Beth Din court for orthodox Jewish couples. I'm not sure this is a good idea since Islamic sharia courts are often dominated by radical clerics. They conjure up images of extreme actions and punishment as experienced in countries where sharia law governs. The British cannot fathom the stoning of an adulterer to death.

Since there is no equality between men and woman before the law, these courts shouldn't be further empowered.

Click here for more.