The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, stirred up a
hornets’ nest when he commented in a BBC interview on February 7
that he could foresee a place for aspects of Sharia Law in Britain
in the future. Responses to his comments have been diverse, with
some opponents calling for his resignation and his supporters
crying foul, saying that he has been misquoted.
Inaccurate reporting is indeed a common flaw of a media hungry
for a good story. Let us therefore return to the Archbishop’s
statements and consider exactly what was said. A full transcript of
the interview can be found online. There are a number of points that emerge from
the statements of the Archbishop.
The first point is a certain lack of self-confidence on the part
of the Archbishop. Rowan Williams is a humble man. This is in
evidence when he says “I’m no expert on this,” thereby seeking to
add a disclaimer to his statements about Sharia Law. So from the
outset we are made to wonder about the Archbishop’s credentials to
quote Muslim jurists, make reference to the Koran and Hadith,
allude to aspects of Islamic history, and highlight Islamic
diversity.
A second point to emerge from the interview is the Archbishop’s
sense of self-assurance that Sharia Law is little different from
other legal codes, and as such should not be seen as threatening.
He declares that “it’s not as if we’re bringing in an alien and
rival system,” and then goes on to call for “a constructive
accommodation with some aspects of Muslim law as we already do with
some kinds of aspects of other religious law,” reminding his
audience that “we have orthodox Jewish courts operating in this
country legally.” So although he has declared himself no expert, we
should be comfortable in his assurances that there’s no need to
fear the accommodation of aspects of Sharia Law in Britain.
A further point to emerge from the interview is his declared
concern that Muslim wishes are accommodated in Britain, declaring
that “it’s very important that you mention…the word ‘choice.’”
His concern for Muslim perspectives is clear and, in reference to
the statement by Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali recently that certain
Muslim neighborhoods were “no-go areas” for non-Muslims, Dr.
Williams states that “many Muslims say that they feel bits of
British society are ‘no go’ areas for them — places that they
can’t go.”
The Archbishop’s comments need to be taken seriously, and
affirmed where appropriate. The first statement deserving of
affirmation is that Dr. Williams is, indeed, no expert. His
inclination to neatly equate Islamic Law with legal systems of
other faiths is superficial and sloppy. The fact is that other
faiths are just that: religious faiths. Islam, by its own account,
is much more than a religious faith. It is a system that insists on
society’s compliance in every sector of human activity: legal,
religious, economic, political, and social. Although Muslims may
disagree on how to implement Islam as the total package, they do
not disagree that Islam is much more than just a private expression
of religious belief.
So while we may wish to compare Christianity with Judaism,
Buddhism, Sikhism, and Hinduism, Islam should be compared with (a)
all those religious faiths (b) Western political systems (c)
Western legal codes and so forth. Islam as a total package is
indeed “a rival system” for British religion, state, and society.
It will remain so until it undergoes a major transformation, one
that would need to entail an acceptance by the Islamic mainstream
of a separation between Faith and State.
ANOTHER OF Dr. Williams’ statements that should be affirmed is that
“we [British] have got a fragmented society at the moment,
internally fragmented, socially fragmented in our cities and
fragmented between communities of different allegiance.” This is
absolutely correct. However, the Archbishop’s proposed remedy —
making space for aspects of Sharia Law — is only likely to
increase the very fragmentation of which he is so critical. Were
aspects of Sharia Law to be integrated within Britain, then it is
highly likely that we would see the Theory of Rising Expectations
come into play: there would then be demands for
more aspects of Sharia Law to be integrated; then more, and more,
and more…
We should also consider the Archbishop’s desire to take account
of the wishes of Muslims. In a November 2004 ICM poll of British Muslims for the
Guardian, 61% of respondents supported the use of Sharia
courts in Britain to resolve civil cases within the Muslim
community. In a February 2006 ICM poll for the Telegraph, 40 percent of
Muslim respondents supported the introduction of Sharia Law to
certain areas of Britain. These results caused shockwaves in
Britain when they were announced. But in the context of Dr.
Williams’ recent statements, we need to remember that on the above
figures somewhere between 40-60 percent of British Muslims do
not support the implementation of Sharia in Britain. Where do
such Muslims fit into the Archbishop’s vision for the future of
Britain?
Clearly Dr. Williams does not speak for the many British Muslims
who do not want to see Sharia Law in Britain. Nor does he speak for
vast numbers of non-Muslim British, on the basis of the torrent or
criticism that his comments have triggered. It should be noted that
much of this criticism has come from within his own constituency,
the Church of England. Dr. Williams has some serious thinking to
do. So does the Church of England.
