48,466
edits
European Court of Human Rights on Shariah Law: Difference between revisions
European Court of Human Rights on Shariah Law (view source)
Revision as of 13:25, 14 September 2013
, 14 September 2013no edit summary
| [checked revision] | [checked revision] |
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) determined on July 31, 2001, that "the institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime, were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society." This statemant was made in connection with the banning of the Welfare Party (''Refah Partisi'', RP), an [[Islam|Islamist]] political party in [[Turkey]].<ref name="ECtHR2001">[{{Reference archive|1=http://web.archive.org/web/20010811161803/http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm|2=2013-09-14}} ECtHR Judgment in the case of Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) Erbakan, Kazan and Tekdal v Turkey] (Press Release 31.7.2001; Judgment 31.7.2001)</ref> | The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) determined on July 31, 2001, that "the institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime, were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society." This statemant was made in connection with the banning of the Welfare Party (''Refah Partisi'', RP), an [[Islam|Islamist]] political party in [[Turkey]].<ref name="ECtHR2001">[{{Reference archive|1=http://web.archive.org/web/20010811161803/http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm|2=2013-09-14}} ECtHR Judgment in the case of Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) Erbakan, Kazan and Tekdal v Turkey] (Press Release 31.7.2001; Judgment 31.7.2001)</ref> | ||
The ban was upheld by the ECtHR on February 13, 2003. Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on the [[Shariah|Shari'ah]], the Court found that, "sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention." It considered that "sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable." | The ban was upheld by the ECtHR on February 13, 2003. Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on the [[Shariah|Shari'ah]], the Court found that, "sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention." It considered that "sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable."<ref name="ECtHR2003">European Court of Human Rights, [{{Reference archive|1=http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Annual_report_2003_ENG.pdf|2=2013-09-14}} "Annual Report 2003"], (2004) p. 21.</ref> | ||
==Texts== | ==Texts== | ||
| Line 66: | Line 66: | ||
Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on sharia law, the Court found that sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention. It considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it”. According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverged from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts. | Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on sharia law, the Court found that sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention. It considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it”. According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverged from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts. | ||
There is no doubt that this judgment is one of the major judgments of the Court in which it endeavours to define the shape and the boundaries of democracy and the rule of law. }} | There is no doubt that this judgment is one of the major judgments of the Court in which it endeavours to define the shape and the boundaries of democracy and the rule of law.<ref name="ECtHR2003"></ref>}} | ||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
| Line 81: | Line 81: | ||
{{page_title|European Court of Human Rights on Shari'ah Law}} | {{page_title|European Court of Human Rights on Shari'ah Law}} | ||
[[Category:Politics and Government]] | |||
[[Category:Islamic Law]] | |||
[[Category:Literature]] | |||
[[Category:Turkey]] | |||