Sharia in Great Britain

Abstract

In Western states with a sizeable Muslim community the introduction of the sharia at least partially, in certain fieldsis being raised again and again. In most cases it is not a question of the Sharia overtaking the local legal system or of establishing a parallel legal structure, but rather the implementation of some elements of Islamic law and the applicability thereof. The Sharia councils/courts, authorized within the Muslim community to interpret Islamic law, deal primarily with family law (marriage and divorce, inheritance, etc.).It should be noted, however, that this is not about the Muslim minorities and their host communities only, but on a more general level has a wider relevance in every religious-cultural community. Namely, how can religious law/rules operate and what is its relation to the official law of the state.In the past few years, wherever this question was raised (mostly in Great-Britain and Canada), it was followed by hot, emotionally charged debates, in which emotional considerations often suppressed rational arguments. Such debates usually did not focus on the operation of the religious courts per se, but rather on the applicability of Islamic law and/or of certain elements of the Sharia. Even more so as the question, besides its legal consequences, has a symbolic relevance over and above the concrete cases. This could serve as a further argument in the debate over the wide-spread narrative of the 'Islamization of Europe' and the (forced) expansion of Islam.There are several topics for debate, even if emotions are put aside/left out of consideration. The question is not only if jurisdiction on a religious basis can coexist with the local 'official' state law, or if the danger of a 'parallel' legal system is realistic, or what happens if religious councils/courts pass a resolution in contradiction with the official legal system of the state. Yet, if the values of a minority culture clash or are different on certain points from the established Western values, this may cause not only a threat to the existing domestic order but may even result in erupting violence. (Among European/Western circumstances such an 'ignition' could be the situation of women in Islam and the legal consequences thereof.) Another question is how the introduction of only some elements of Islamic law would affect the protection of human rights of the individualsyet again a very

Press discourses on ecological crises in the UK, Israel, and Hungary

“…While the CR press repeatedly uses the personal pronoun “us” and “we”, through which it articulates the local context as a homogenous national community with national interests (e.g., in the Hungarian Magyar Hírlap “What did we get in Glasgow”) (Rácz, 2021 ), the CL press tends to avoid using the personal pronoun “we”. Instead it tends to use the term “countries”, e.g., “pressure that countries need to feel” (Harvey, 2021 ) or “various countries have made loud promises about the protection of forests” (Horovitz, 2017 ; Rostoványi, 2021 ). However, in an article in Israel's Haaretz regarding Trump's decision to leave the Paris Agreement, Shlomo Avineri, a well-known political science professor, constructs the boundaries not just in geographic terms but also in terms of a universal political regime: “one can only hope that (Trump's) years in the White House will be over before too much damage is caused to the United States, to the world and to the future of liberal democracy” (Avineri, 2017 ).…”

“…But we also saw the huge public recruitment, especially of young people, for life and the necessary change”. The Hungarian press cited the words of the president of Palau island, pointing out the vulnerability of developing countries and islands (Rostoványi, 2021 ). It cites Tuvalu's leader's words about the negative impact the islands have to face and addresses the inequality of CO2 emission and its impact globally (Varga, 2021 ).…”