Britain's Law Society Withdraws Practice Note On Drafting Sharia-Compliant Wills

Last March, the Law Society of England and Wales issued a Practice Note to assist British solicitors whose clients ask them to draw up wills that comply with Sharia law. The Law Society's action drew criticism from those who objected that such wills may deny women an equal share of an estate and exclude "illegitimate" children or unbelievers. (See prior posting.) Yesterday the Law Society announced that it has withdrawn the Practice Note, saying in part:

Our practice note was intended to support members to better serve their clients as far as is allowed by the law of England and Wales.  We reviewed the note in the light of criticism. We have withdrawn the note and we are sorry.

The Telegraph reports on reaction to the Law Society's latest action.

British Group Rallies Against Rising Anti-Semitism

In Britain on Sunday, some 3500 to 4500 people gathered in front of London's Royal Courts of Justice to protest rising anti-Semitism in Britain. As reported by International Business Times, the rally was organized by the Campaign Against Anti-Semitism (CAAS) which said that Jews in Britain are facing levels of anti-Semitism not seen in almost a century. CAAS called on police to demonstrate a zero-tolerance for anti-Semitism.

UN Committee Concerned Over Child Trafficking For Religious Rituals In Britain

As reported by AFP, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child yesterday released its observations on the report of Great Britain relating to child trafficking. (Full text of UN document),   Among other things, the U.N. committee expressed particular concern about trafficking of children for use in religious rituals:

The Committee is strongly concerned that thousands of children continue to be trafficked every year in the State party, particularly for sexual exploitation and labour, and it expresses its deepest concern about reports that hundreds of children have been abducted from their families in Africa and trafficked to the State party for brutal religious rituals, such as the so-called voodoo and juju rituals. 

British Trial Court Rejects Claim That Wealthy Family's Property Was Held Under Hindu/ Sikh Law

Singh v. Singh, (EWHC, April 8, 2014) is a property dispute between members of an extremely wealthy Sikh family living in Britain. In the case, the eldest son in the family, Jasminder Singh, claims ownership of Tetworth Hall, described as "a spacious house standing in its own grounds on the edge of Ascot race course." He also claims ownership of 5.28% of the shares of Edwardian Group, Ltd., a very profitable company that operates hotels in central London and elsewhere. Both the house and the company shares are registered in Jasminder's name.

According to the court, Jasminder's father, however, claims that:

these and other items of property are joint family assets which are held in accordance with the principles of what is known as the Mitakshara. This is the legal code ... by which a Hindu family living and eating together as a composite household may hold its property. The code which is of very ancient origin applies as much to Sikhs as to Hindus. This is relevant because, as their name implies, the Singh family are Sikhs. The beneficial interest in property of a joint Hindu (or Sikh) family, if held subject to the Mitakshara, belongs jointly to the male members of that family down to the third generation from a common male ancestor.

Jasminder responds that: "until this dispute first arose he had never even heard of the Mitakshara, let alone had any understanding of how it operates."

The court prefaced a lengthy review of the family's history with this observation:

If nothing else this litigation has highlighted the extraordinary enterprise that has enabled the Singh family, in the space of just two generations, to rise from obscurity and very modest circumstances in what was then rural British India, overcome all manner of difficulties, come eventually to this country and make a fortune for itself. I dare say it is not untypical of many such families but there can be few whose rise has been quite so meteoric. The family's story as it unfolded in the course of this trial has a heroic quality to it. It has made it all the more painful to have to listen to the tragic differences that now divide its members.

In a 248 paragraph opinion, th High Court judge concluded:

At the end of the day the question is whether Father has demonstrated that as between himself and Jasminder there existed an understanding that any property which they or either of them acquired would be held as joint family property.... I am unable to find that there was such an understanding.

[Thanks to Law & Religion UK for the lead.] 

The Story Behind The Niqab Wearing British Defendant

Last September, a good deal of attention was given to rulings by a British judge in the case of a Muslim woman charged with witness intimidation who sought to keep her face fully covered by her niqab at her arraignment and subsequently at her trial. (See prior posting). In a lengthy article yesterday, The Independent reports the back story on defendant Rebecca Dawson. The witness intimidation charges grew out of an encounter between Dawson and a volunteer caretaker at a local mosque who was planning to testify against Dawson's husband in his trial on assault charges.  According to the report:

At the root of the case, so it seemed, lay a dispute between two factions at the Finsbury Park Mosque. One believed that it was acceptable for tourists to be shown around the mosque with their heads uncovered and in Western dress; the other did not. Dawson’s husband was firmly in the latter camp, and when he learned that the caretaker had shown around a group of “improperly” dressed Portuguese visitors, he had gone to the mosque and duffed him up.

When the jury was deadlocked after 10 hours, Dawson agreed to a plea deal.  While awaiting sentence, Dawson went to trial along with her husband on other charges-- disseminating YouTube videos glorifying the terrorist killing of Fusilier Lee Rigby.

British Government Proposes Shariah-Compliant Student Loan Program Alternative

Last week, the British government's Department for Business, Innovation and Skills announced a proposal to make available Shariah-compliant student loans to Muslim students.  (Full text of Consultation On a Shariah-Compliant Alternative Finance Product).  The Executive Summary explains the proposal in part as follows:

In September 2012 changes to higher education funding mean that students are able take out student loans for tuition of up to £9000 for each year of study. These post-2012 loans carry a different rate of interest, above inflation, to student loans issued before September 2012. 

Some students, whose religious beliefs may forbid the taking out of a loan that bears interest, may be unable to take advantage of student loans because of this change. This could make it more difficult for them to benefit from higher education. 

The Government have been exploring the possibility of making an alternative student finance product available. This finance product would be Sharia-compliant and overseen by a Sharia advisory committee. Any such alternative finance product would not result in a student being in any way disadvantaged or advantaged over a student who took out a traditional student loan. Both the size of the finance and the repayment amounts would be equivalent between the two systems. The model of the proposed product could be applied for in the same way as a traditional loan: through the Student Loans Company (SLC).

The Telegraph reports on the proposal. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

Britain's Law Society Taking Heat For Guidance To Lawyers On Drafting Wills For Muslim Clients

The Telegraph reports today that members of Britain's Parliament are calling for an investigation by the House of Commons into a March 13 Practice Note issued by The Law Society to assist British solicitors whose clients ask them to draw up wills that comply with Sharia law. (Full text of Sharia succession rules Practice Note.) Some are accusing The Law Society of giving its stamp of approval to wills that deny women an equal share of an estate and exclude "illegitimate" children or unbelievers.  The Law Society says it was merely responding to requests from lawyers for guidance in helping Muslim clients carry out their wishes.

British Court Dismisses Fraud Charges Against President of Mormon Church

In Phillips v. Monson, (Westminster Magistrate's Court, March 20, 2014), a British magistrate's court set aside two summonses for fraud that were issued by the court last month ordering the president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to appear to answer to charges that seven specified teachings of the Mormon church violated Britain's Fraud Act 2006. The summons were issued on the complaint of a private citizen-- a former member of the Mormon church who runs a website critical of the church. (See prior posting.) In yesterday's decision, the court concluded that the essential elements of a fraud violation were not set forth in the information presented. The magistrate judge went on to find:

It is obvious that this proposed prosecution attacks the doctrine and beliefs of the Mormon Church, and is aimed at those beliefs rather than any wrong-doing of Mr. Monson personally.  The purpose is to use criminal proceedings to expose the false (it is said) facts on which the church is based.

.... To convict, a jury would need to be sure that the religious teachings of the Mormon Church are untrue or misleading.... No judge in a secular court in England and Wales would allow that issue to be put to a jury.  It is non-justiciable.

I am satisfied that the process of the court is being manipulated to provide a high-profile forum to attack the religious beliefs of others.  It is an abuse of the process of the court.

BBC News and Deseret News report on the decision. [Thanks to Austin Smith for the lead.]

British Broadcast Agency Approves KFC's Parody Christmas Ad Campaign

In Britain, broadcast industry self-regulation requires all broadcast ads to be pre-approved to make certain that they comply with the UK Code of Broadcast Advertising.  Most of the pre-clearance is done by Clearcast-- an agency created by the country's largest broadcasters.  Huffington Post reported yesterday that Kentucky Fried Chicken has obtained clearance for its tongue-in-cheek Christmas ad campaign that some complained mocked Christian worship:

The two television ads and a video on demand ad featured a group of carol singers outside a house singing the lyrics: "We showed up at your house again singing all our stupid songs", with the male homeowner replying: "Normally I'd hose you down, but now it just seems wrong."

European Court of Human Rights Upholds British Refusal To Treat Mormon Temple As Place of Public Worship For Tax Purposes

In Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints v. United Kingdom, (ECHR, March 4, 2014), the European Court of Human Rights, Fourth Section, held that Britain did not violate the non-discrimination provisions of Art. 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights, nor the freedom of conscience and religion provisions of Art. 9, when it held that a Mormon Temple was subject to a reduced tax rate as a place used for charitable purposes, but was not entitled to the full exemption from property taxes that is available to places of "public religious worship."  Entry to the Temple is limited to devout Church members who hold a "recommend" from the bishop. The Church's stake center, with its chapel, hall and ancillary rooms, on the same site had been granted the full exemption since entry to them was not limited. In finding no discrimination, the Court said in part:

To establish differential treatment, the applicant Church relied on the argument that, because of the nature of its doctrine, which holds that access to the temple should be restricted to its most devout members who hold a current “recommend”, the law ... provided a lower fiscal advantage to the Mormon Church than to such other faiths as to not restrict access to any of their places of worship.... [I]t is open to doubt whether the refusal to accord an exemption in respect of the applicant Church’s temple in Preston gave rise to any difference of treatment of comparable groups, given that the tax law in question applied in the same way to, and produced the same result in relation to, all religious organisations, including the Church of England in respect of its private chapels. Neither is the Court convinced that the applicant Church was in a significantly different position from other churches ... so as to call for differential treatment ..., since other faiths likewise do not allow access of the public to certain of their places of worship for doctrinal reasons.

Law & Religion UK reports on the decision. [Thanks To Paul DeMello, Jr. for the lead.]

British Court Uses Anti-Social Behavior Orders Against Islamic Radicals

Britain's Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Sec. 1, permits courts to issue an Anti-Social Behavior Order (ASBO) against anyone who has acted "in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons..." Friday's London Mirror and Mail Online report on the innovative use of this power against Islamic radicals in London. Three Muslim men who have been acting as a vigilante Muslim Patrol to enforce Sharia norms in East London received 5-year ASOBs last Friday barring them from making unsolicited approaches to people to promote Sharia law.  The ringleader of the 3, Jordan Horner, also had restrictions placed on him designed to prevent him from preaching extremist Islamic views.  He is prohibited from possessing a bullhorn in any public place, and barred from entering any place of education unless as a student or to visiting relatives. The men are also prohibited from meeting with each other, as well as with a fourth named person or with controversial Islamist Anjem Choudary.

British Court Issues Summons To Mormon Church Head Alleging Teachings Violate Fraud Act

In Britain last week, a Magistrate's Court issued two nearly identical summonses  (full text 1, 2) to Thomas S. Monson, president of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, ordering him to appear before the court to answer to charges that seven specified teachings of the Mormon church violated Britain's Fraud Act 2006.  The Telegraph reported yesterday that the summonses stem from a little used procedure in which a private citizen who claims to have evidence that someone has committed a crime can ask a magistrate to summons the alleged violator to respond to charges. Here the private prosecution was filed by Thomas Phillips, a former Mormon who runs MormonThink, a website highly critical of the LDS Church. The summonses allege that Stephen Bloor, a former Mormon bishop, and Christopher Denis Ralph, a former convert, were misled by Mormon teachings to pay an annual tithe to the Church. Volokh Conspiracy discusses the case further.

British Tribunal Awards Wiccan Witch Damages For Unfair Dismissal and Religious Discrimination In Employment

In Britain, in the first case of its kind, an Employment Tribunal at Watford (near London) has awarded a total of over £15,000 ($24,500 US) for unfair dismissal, sex discrimination and religious discrimination in a suit brought by a Wiccan witch who claims she was fired by her employers who were horrified when they learned of her beliefs.  According to last week's Daily Mail, Karen Holland had worked for two years at the newspaper and magazine concession at the Londis store in West Hemple when in October the news agency was taken over by two brothers, Tarloch and Gurnam Singh (who are Sikhs). They discovered Holland's beliefs later that month when she returned from celebrating All Hallows' Eve (also known as the Pagan Festival of the Dead).  They began to ridicule her and fired her the next month after accusing her of stealing a magazine and a lottery ticket. In finding for Holland, the Tribunal judge said that the manner in which she was fired was "indefensible" and breached "the basics of natural justice." The owners are appealing the decision, saying the damage award will destroy their business.

Britain's Court of Appeal: Christian Radio Ad Barred By Ban On Political Advertising

Britain's Communications Act 2003 prohibits the broadcasting of any "advertisement which is directed towards a political end."  In London Christian Radio Ltd. v Radio Advertising Clearance Centre, (Ct. App., Nov. 19, 2013), the England & Wales Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision held that a proposed ad from a publisher of Christian magazines that was to be run on a Christian radio station violates this ban.  The proposed ad stated:

We are CCP. Surveys have shown that over 60% of active Christians consider that Christians are being increasingly marginalised in the work place. We are concerned to get the most accurate data to inform the public debate. We will then use this data to help make a fairer society. Please visit CCPmagazines.co.uk and report your experiences.

In upholding the decision of the Radio Advertising Clearance Center to bar the ad, Lord Justice Dyson said in part:

What matters is the effect of an advertisement on political debate. The question is whether it will frustrate the statutory aim of ensuring that, so far as practicable, the playing field of political debate is level....

Lord Justice Elias dissenting said in part:

The only issue is whether, considered objectively and by focusing solely on the advertisement, the listener is being subjected to a partial political message.... The fact that the purpose is to enable the advertiser in future to seek to exert such influence and operate as a more effective pressure group does not in my judgment amount to an infringement of [the statute].

Huffington Post UK reports on the decision.