Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Sharia
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
==== European Court of Human Rights ==== In 1998, the [[Constitutional Court of Turkey]] banned and dissolved Turkey's [[Welfare Party|Refah Party]] over its announced intention to introduce Sharia-based laws, ruling that it would change Turkey's secular order and undermine democracy.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kevin Boyle |year=2004 |title=Human Rights, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case |url=http://projects.essex.ac.uk/EHRR/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Essex Human Rights Review |volume=1 |page=2 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421043912/http://projects.essex.ac.uk/ehrr/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |archive-date=21 April 2018 |access-date=16 April 2019 |number=1}}</ref> On appeal by Refah the [[European Court of Human Rights]] determined that "sharia is incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy".<ref>{{cite web |date=13 February 2003 |title=Refah Partisi (The Welfare Party) and Others v. Turkey |url=http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol6iss1/special_5.htm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141129160352/http://www.icnl.org/research/journal/vol6iss1/special_5.htm |archive-date=29 November 2014 |access-date=20 November 2014 |publisher=The International Journal of Not-for-Profit Law}}</ref><ref>[http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/29AC6DBD-C3F8-411C-9B97-B42BE466EE7A/0/2004__Wildhaber_Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf Hearing of the European Court of Human Rights] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060528154417/http://www.echr.coe.int/NR/rdonlyres/29AC6DBD-C3F8-411C-9B97-B42BE466EE7A/0/2004__Wildhaber_Cancado_Trindade_BIL__opening_legal_year.pdf|date=28 May 2006}}, 22 January 2004 (PDF)</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=ECHR press release Refah Partisi (2001) |url=http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100124050055/http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2001/July/RefahPartisi2001jude.htm |archive-date=24 January 2010 |access-date=4 April 2012 |publisher=Echr.coe.int}}</ref> Refah's Sharia-based notion of a "plurality of legal systems, grounded on religion" was ruled to contravene the [[European Convention on Human Rights|European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms]]. It was determined that it would "do away with the State's role as the guarantor of individual rights and freedoms" and "infringe the principle of non-discrimination between individuals as regards their enjoyment of public freedoms, which is one of the fundamental principles of democracy".<ref>Christian Moe (2012), Refah Revisited: Strasbourg's Construction of Islam, in Islam, Europe and emerging legal issues (editors: W. Cole Durham Jr. et al.), {{ISBN|978-1409434443}}, pp. 235β71</ref> In an analysis, Maurits S. Berger found the ruling to be "nebulous" and surprising from a legal point of view, since the Court neglected to define what it meant by "Sharia" and would not, for example, be expected to regard Sharia rules for Islamic rituals as contravening European human rights values.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Maurits S. Berger |year=2018 |title=Understanding Sharia in the West |journal=Journal of Law, Religion and State |publisher=Brill |volume=6 |issue=2β3 |pages=236β73 |doi=10.1163/22124810-00602005 |doi-access=free|hdl=1887/62331 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Kevin Boyle also criticized the decision for not distinguishing between extremist and mainstream interpretations of Islam and implying that peaceful advocacy of Islamic doctrines ("an attitude which fails to respect [the principle of secularism]") is not protected by the European Convention provisions for freedom of religion.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Kevin Boyle |year=2004 |title=Human Rights, Religion and Democracy: The Refah Party Case |url=http://projects.essex.ac.uk/EHRR/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |url-status=live |journal=Essex Human Rights Review |volume=1 |page=12 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180421043912/http://projects.essex.ac.uk/ehrr/V1N1/Boyle.pdf |archive-date=21 April 2018 |access-date=16 April 2019 |number=1}}</ref>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Sharia
(section)
Add topic