SHARIA

Margaret Wente had a reasonable article in Saturday's Toronto Globe & Mail about Ontario's new acceptance of Sharia law.

The province of Ontario has authorized the use of sharia law in civil arbitrations, if both parties consent. The arbitrations will deal with such matters as property, marriage, divorce, custody and inheritance. The arbitrators can be imams, Muslim elders or lawyers. In theory, their decisions aren't supposed to conflict with Canadian civil law. But because there is no third-party oversight, and no duty to report decisions, no outsider will ever know if they do. These decisions can be appealed to the regular courts. But for Muslim women, the pressures to abide by the precepts of sharia are overwhelming. To reject sharia is, quite simply, to be a bad Muslim.

In my experience, Muslims will generally express support for Sharia when speaking - a good Muslim would not verbally reject 'God's laws.' But, in practice, fewer of them would choose to have Sharia law in a secret ballot. When I say that I'm specifically thinking of election results in Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia - where the hard-core Islamists find limited support (the Gulf states are completely different beasts).

So, if Malaysia's Muslims reject establishing a Sharia-governed state, why would Ontario's Muslims seek to have one? Wente notes:

The law permitting a sharia court was passed in 1991, when Ontario sought to streamline the overloaded court system (and save money) by diverting certain civil cases to arbitration, including arbitration conducted on religious principles.

Say, 1991. Wasn't that Bob Rae?

To be fair, I'm sure the NDP wasn't thinking that Sharia courts would be the result of the 1991 Arbitration Act. But, again in fairness, a government should be thinking when it passes laws. Wente notes that the Canadian Council of Muslim Women, which opposes the law, was not consulted about it.

Wente's item mostly stems from an interview with Homa Arjomand, an Iranian woman who fled that country in 1989 after "many of her activist friends had already been tried and executed."

"I chose to come to Canada because of multiculturalism," says Ms. Arjomand, who gave up a career in medical science to work with women who are victims of abuse. "But when I came here, I realized how much damage multiculturalism is doing to women. I'm against it strongly now. It has become a barrier to women's rights."

I hope to see this thing repealed before we get horror stories about divorce proceedings where wife abuse isn't seen as grounds for divorce.

For those who are inclined toward activism, Arjomand has a website trying to organize oppositions to Canada's Sharia court.