Archbishop Williams and Sharia Courts

[Volokh, Eugene]

    Is the Archbishop talking about different legal rules for different
communities selected by government decision, or just about binding
arbitration (in whatever system, religious or otherwise, of their
choice) for those parties who so agree by contract?  I had assumed it
was the latter, but maybe I'm mistaken.
 
    Eugene


________________________________

	From: religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu
[mailto:religionlaw-bounces at lists.ucla.edu] On Behalf Of Steven Jamar
	Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 4:58 PM
	To: Law & Religion issues for Law Academics
	Subject: Re: Archbishop Williams and Sharia Courts
	
	
	This is an interesting issue that I am currently studying on a
comparative basis -- particularly in parts of Africa where you can have
all sorts of personal law (family and inheritance mostly) determined by
different systems.  In Mauritania you can have the general civil law,
Islamic law, pastoral customary law, or nomadic customary law control. 

	South Africa is struggling with this now as well with its
general civil law, a large population that is Muslim, and various
indigenous practices.

	I plan a trip to South Africa in 2010 to study this, in between
world cup games . . .   :)


	Steve

	On Feb 7, 2008, at 12:55 PM, Vance R. Koven wrote:


		I love pregnant controversies like this. The Archbishop
of Canterbury has endorsed the idea of allowing, to some undefined
extent, separate legal systems apply to different religious and cultural
groups in Britain, notably Sharia law for Muslims.
		
		News story here:
		http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7232661.stm
		
		While the UK, like the US, supports parties' ability to
stipulate that a particular dispute may be submitted to religious courts
so long as they consent and there are no other social externalities, to
what extent can a constitutionally bound polity permit such things if
not all parties consent, or if a party withdraws consent? And to what
extent should secular courts recognize the judgments of religious courts
when the outcomes transgress certain public policies of the state? And
to what extent should the parties' agreement to apply religious law
govern an action in a secular court (and if it's like a choice-of-law
clause in a contract, how is the applicable law "proven")?
		
		One tends to think about the deference paid to
commercial arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act, but even there
a court need not enforce an award that contravenes public policy, and
there are some rather fine distinctions drawn about when a court will
strike an arbitration clause. At the same time, courts have permitted
arbitrators to hear and decide claims under regulatory statutes like the
antitrust laws and the securities laws.
		
		Without a written constitution, it may be difficult to
ascertain how far such deference (in the case of religious courts) could
go in the UK. Are there limits in the US beyond the limits to which
parties can make contracts?
		
		Vance
		
		-- 
		Vance R. Koven
		Boston, MA USA
		vrkoven at world.std.com 
		_______________________________________________
		To post, send message to Religionlaw at lists.ucla.edu
		To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get
password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw

		Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot
be viewed as private.  Anyone can subscribe to the list and read
messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list
members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.


	--  
	Prof. Steven D. Jamar                               vox:
202-806-8017
	Howard University School of Law                     fax:
202-806-8567
	2900 Van Ness Street NW
mailto:stevenjamar at gmail.com
	Washington, DC  20008
http://iipsj.com/SDJ/

	"In these words I can sum up everything I've learned about life:
It goes on." 

	

	
	

	Robert Frost



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/religionlaw/attachments/20080207/96740164/attachment.htm