A still from Panorama's undercover report on sharia in Britain

"The western experiment of women working outside of their homes has proved its negative effects". This is according to an article entitled "Methods of westernising women and its effects" on Islamweb, a site that describes itself as increasing awareness of the "mission of Islam". The article goes on to describe how pretty much everything wrong with the world is the result of selfish women wanting to work and includes the extraordinary statement: "deviant women are incubators of all forms of evil". This is certainly not an attitude that is exclusive to a small number of Muslims, but attitudes to women can expose a large gaping hole between western and Islamic societies and societal norms. It is also a very important battle in any "cultural clash". When Islamism tightened its grip in the Middle East following the Arab spring one of the first acts of new Islamist governments was to restrict the rights of women — it was a priority, just as it is a priority among Islamists here. 

The Islamic Sharia Council (ISC) advises primarily on family law matters and gives women inaccurate advice on the law regarding domestic violence. In an undercover report filmed by Panorama, Suhaib Hasan — a senior cleric at the ISC who has previously called for stoning and amputation to be introduced to Britain — wrongly told a woman she would have to leave her home if she reported domestic violence to the police. He also asked if her husband left marks on her body when he hit her (this is the line — sharia allows men to hit their wives provided they leave no visible evidence of it). Haitham al-Haddad, another adviser at the ISC is on record as saying "a man should not be questioned why he hit his wife". Over at the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, Britain's second largest sharia organisation behind the ISC, a spokesman told the BBC that he was engaged in discussions with the Crown Prosecution Service and the police to seek an "alternative form of resolution" for domestic violence cases for Muslims; the aim of establishing a full system of sharia-based family law is openly acknowledged. 

Domestic violence is not the only area of sharia family law that causes concern however. Women have little right to divorce under sharia, children go in to the custody of fathers from a preset age (regardless of the circumstances), and marital rape was described as "impossible" by the President of the ISC Maulana Abu Sayeed. So what is the response to all of this? Absolute unequivocal condemnation? Not a bit of it. Instead, we have respected figures like Rowan Williams reiterate his white-washing of sharia family law at Temple Church in Fleet Street recently. He again hinted at future integration of sharia law when he said "it needs to be made accountable and professional in ways which the legal establishment and statutory authority is best placed to take forward". He is of course not the only public figure to sanitise sharia. Former Lord Chief Justice Nicholas Phillips also argues that there is "no reason why Sharia principles, or any other religious code, should not be the basis for mediation or other forms of alternative dispute resolution". No reason? This should worry us.