A decision today by the European Court of Human Rights deserves notice. It's the case of Kasymakhunov and Saybatalov v. Russia, in which two members of the Islamist group, Hizb ut-Tahrir, complained that the Russian government did not respect their rights. In the course of its decision, the court looked at the Shari'a in light of the "Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms" and confirmed a 1998 decision (concerning an Islamist party in Turkey) that Shari'a is incompatible with the Convention:
the Court observes that the regime that Hizb ut-Tahrir intends to set up will be based on sharia. However, it has previously found a regime based on sharia to be incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervenes in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts. An organisation whose actions seem to be aimed at introducing sharia in a State Party to the Convention can hardly be regarded as complying with the democratic ideal that underlies the whole of the Convention.
Comments: (1) Good to see on of the European Union's highest courts reiterate that the Shari'a is unacceptable. (2) It would be helpful if public figures such as the former archbishop of Canterbury concurred. (March 14, 2013)