Islamic phone marriage invalid, says court

[mawilson 2,133]

Three senior judges have waded in to the contentious issue of Britain’s tolerance

of Sharia law after refusing to recognise an arranged marriage sealed over the

telephone between the UK and Bangladesh.

The Court of Appeal on Thursday ruled that the Islamic union between a 26-year-old

British man with severe learning disabilities and his Bangladeshi bride was invalid

under English law, saying that it was “simply inconceivable” that the man had the

mental capacity to wed.

Were the marriage consummated, his own wife would be guilty of rape under laws

criminalising sex with mentally disabled people, the court said.

The decision will add fuel to the political and religious firestorm over how the

government and courts should accommodate Sharia law, which many feel raises

difficult questions about issues such as women’s rights, child custody and criminal

punishment.

Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, sparked the controversy last month

when he suggested in a widely reported interview with the BBC that the introduction

of certain aspects of Islamic law in Britain may be “unavoidable”.

Dr Williams has since said his comments were misunderstood and that he did not

intend to cause any distress.

City of Westminster Social and Community Services initially sought a court declaration

that the man in question in Thursday’s judgment, known only as “IC”, lacked the

requisite capacity to marry.

A formal case was brought after it was revealed that IC, who has the mental level

of a three-year-old and has been supported by the local authority for most of his

life, was married over the telephone in September 2006.

Their families believed that the marriage would allow for his bride, known as NK, to

obtain a visa to enable her to join her husband permanently in Britain.

In general, valid marriages celebrated abroad are entitled to recognition under English

law.

According to expert evidence submitted to the court, IC’s and NK’s marriage was

considered valid under Islamic principles because IC’s father, as his son’s lawful

guardian, had consented to the arrangement.

In a sweeping rejection of that argument, Lord Justice Wall said that the court could

no longer side-step the “clash” between English notions of welfare and those embraced

by Islam.

While to his Bangladeshi family and friends the marriage may be seen as a means of

protecting IC, it would be perceived as “exploitative and indeed abusive” to an English

lawyer, the appeals judge said.

There will be a full High Court hearing in August to determine IC’s future. An order

bars contact between him and NK – they have never met in person.

Link

[garya505 2]

Did they have phone sex on their wedding night?

[Ban Hammer 13,641]

[SnowyTater 0]

I bet a lot of us here have met their SO's online...

Did anyone else ever have to sit through people talking about/planning/actually DOING an online chatroom wedding where people typed out 'do you take this man' and 'I do' and *clap clap* and #######? xD

Sorry if you're um...one of those people that did this.

But seriously xD

[Sofiyya 1,687]

There's nothing Islamic about phone marriages, nor does Sharia allow mentally incapacitated people to marry. Free and willing competent consent is a requirement of a valid marriage contract.

Just more ignorant hyperbolics from the press.

[Y's_habibitk 2]

I bet a lot of us here have met their SO's online...

Did anyone else ever have to sit through people talking about/planning/actually DOING an online chatroom wedding where people typed out 'do you take this man' and 'I do' and *clap clap* and #######? xD

Sorry if you're um...one of those people that did this.

But seriously xD

Really? not to sound too naive.. but this happens???? J_H_C

Lisa

[yaziedandlisa 0]

hmmm? i guess islamic marraige should have those things: people on real:

2 male witnesses.. adults and with their full mind power

the judge

and the bride and groom!!

i heared about this kind of marraige its called proxy marraige.. but it doesnt work i think

[almaty 19]

Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury, sparked the controversy last month

when he suggested in a widely reported interview with the BBC that the introduction

of certain aspects of Islamic law in Britain may be “unavoidable”.

I think, the Archbishop needs to do more studying before making a comment, i re. to this situation

[sandinista! 1,816]

There's nothing Islamic about phone marriages, nor does Sharia allow mentally incapacitated people to marry. Free and willing competent consent is a requirement of a valid marriage contract.

Just more ignorant hyperbolics from the press.

but it makes such a sensational headline to tack on the completely incidental part about both parties' religious persuasion!

the case was overturned strictly on the basis of the man's mental incapacity. would this woman and her family have consented to such a marriage were it not for the added benefit of entry and later residence in the uk? probably not. would the marriage be valid and not raise any objections if both were planning to stay in bangladesh, with no immigration issues involved? maybe, despite such a marriage being a total violation of very, very important aspects of islamic law regarding marriage.

on another note though, in italy last year, there was a case of a pakistani couple who wed over the phone, with the groom being a legal resident of italy. the wife was initially barred from entering italy by the italian embassy in pakistan, but a judge in italy later ruled that that was wrong and because their telephone wedding was legally recognized in pakistan, then this man had the right to bring his wife to italy with him. neither of them were mentally incapacitated. italy is not the uk, but it is interesting that a european country ruled on that case in the manner it did. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6380911.stm