Earlier this month, Florida Judge Richard A. Neilson ruled a civil dispute over a mosque at the Islamic Education Center of Tampa brought on by several of its trustees would proceed “under Ecclesiastical Islamic Law”! First, to have the disputing parties try to settle it among themselves, then within the Muslim community then, if still not settled, before an Islamic judge which, in my opinion, prevents the parties from seeking legal remedies from the larger community of legal recourse available to all other Americans. The order was a response to the plantiff's emergency motion to enforce an arbitrator's award. It appears to me, and I'm not an attorney, if Muslims in Florida enter a arbitration agreement using Islamic law they lock themselves into a narrow framwork that will likely upheld by the Florida court.
Judge Neilson's order effectively acknowledges and advances sharia law as a legitimate tool for settling matters between Muslims in the U.S. In Texas in 2003, an appeals court ruled in another arbitratation case similarly.
It's a disturbing trend.
Update 3/22/11: "...But attorney Paul Thanasides last week appealed Nielson's decision with the 2nd District Court of Appeal, saying religion has no place in a secular court. His client: the mosque.
"The mosque believes wholeheartedly in the Koran and its teachings," Thanasides said Monday. "They certainly follow Islamic law in connection with their spiritual endeavors. But with respect to secular endeavors, they believe Florida law should apply in Florida courts."
-----
Also see:
Recent Comments