Browsing by Author "Zahir, Ali Ahmed"

Muslims living in England live in a real predicament. On the one hand, they have to face the reality that the laws governing the family institution are secular in nature. This poses a threat to their identity and freedom of religion. On the other hand, they are commanded by Islam to settle their disputes according to its laws and principles. However, this is unrealistic, simply since the only recognized legal system in England is the English Law. To circumvent this situation, certain Muslim scholars and communities have established quasi-judicial courts, acting in the capacity of mediators, counsellors, arbitrators, and even judges, to settle marital disputes. These courts, known as Shari‘ah councils, provide a modern approach to alternative dispute resolution, whereby Muslim families and individuals can have their disputes resolved amicably. It was also set up as a response by Muslims to adapt to life under the English secular laws in which they live in, that do not afford them the right of having a Shari‘ah-based institution. Although the concept of alternative dispute resolution through arbitration dates back to pre-Islamic Arabia, with its advent Islam established a more codified and principled approach to the matter. Therefore, one of the objectives of this thesis was to give readers a deeper insight into the concept and procedures of Islamic judicial system, including arbitration, and its application to the Muslim-minority context in England. Additionally, the researcher has penned down several Islamic legal maxims relating to Muslim family law, which can be used as a template for current Shari‘ah council operations and even future set-ups. By employing both theoretical and qualitative methods, the researcher aims at developing a practical and empirical approach to this genre of Islamic studies. Furthermore, the researcher conducted interviews, collected data on arbitrational cases, and analysed them to give a better understanding of the inner workings, structural logic, and operation of several Shari‘ah councils. As a result, it was found that all members of the Shari‘ah councils interviewed were graduates from Islamic law faculties. It was also observed that none of the Shari‘ah councils interviewed adhered to any one particular school of law when adjudicating cases. Interestingly, amid the backlash, criticism, and negative portrayal of Shari‘ah councils by the media and politicians, there is an increasing demand for their work and services. The researcher found that on average 94% of arbitrational awards were accepted and enforced by litigants willingly. Last but not least, the researcher critically analysed arbitrational cases by the said Shari‘ah councils to determine whether or not Islamic arbitration procedures were followed as well as to determine whether the deliberation was given to meet the highest standards of Islamic adjudication. Given the fact that there is currently no appellate review by any of the said Shari‘ah councils, it is hoped that this thesis will also serve as a critical examination and review of their past judgments/decisions.

Muslims in the U.S. are increasingly looking to integrate into its society while trying not to lose their identity as Muslims. They find themselves in a dilemma when it comes to the issue of congratulating and even partaking in the festivals of the non-Muslims in the U.S. This issue has gained prominence and momentum after the event of 9-11, in which the Muslims wanted to show and prove their tolerance and acceptance towards others while trying to hold onto and maintain the core principles of Islam. For this reason, this topic is a hotly debated issue in the U.S. and the West in general and a cause of division and confusion amongst Muslims. However, in order to justify their position and feel that they are following the teachings of Islam, they turned to the Islamic scholars, both in the West and the Muslim world, regarding the permissibility or prohibition of congratulating and partaking in non-Muslim festivals. Hence, some scholars scrambled to pass fatawa that would make the lives of Muslim minorities living in the U.S. easier in order to better integrate and accept the culture and customs of its people without having to attract unnecessary attention. Though the fatawa of prohibition have been present in the books from the time of the classical scholars, they did not gain prominence and/or were not seen as a refuting force against the claim of permissibility, except after the dust had settled and emotions were not running as high as they were in the initial months and years following 9-11. This dissertation employs a qualitative methodology to analyze the fatawa of permissibility from a juristic, comparative, content and discourse point of view. By using these methodologies the researcher proves how the consensus of the classical scholars was broken, verses of the Quran and Hadith used out of context and/or weak, and contradictory statements made sometimes even in the same book. Additionally, this dissertation gives readers an insight, through a questionnaire that was conducted by the researcher, into how the Muslims in the U.S. perceive the issue of congratulating and/or partaking in the religious festivals of the non-Muslims. The study conducted found that 66% of Muslim respondents in the U.S. do not congratulate and partake in the religious holidays of the non-Muslims. It also found that 45% of Muslims in the U.S. believe that religious identity of Muslims will eventually be lost if they start to partake in the religious holidays of the non-Muslims, while 29% of respondents said maybe. Last but not least, it also makes an effort to educate the readers in the paganistic origins of some of the holidays in the U.S., which may have otherwise been overlooked by the Islamic contemporary scholars when issuing their fatawa of permissibility.