Friday 12 May 2017

The Role of Mediation: Sharia and English Law Perspective

Shariah and Law Department Guest Talk by Dr.Sobia Abdul Razaq, Senior Lecturer, University of Westminster, UK - Lecture delivered on 3rd August 2015.

Starting from April 2012 divorce petitioners need to attend mandatory mediation to avoid courts litigations. The mediation is done privately where there was about 200,000 cases of separation in a year. This requirement is expected to cut public legal aid cost on the divorce cases. The charge for mediation is only GBP100 - GB150 per hour compared to GBP10K - GBP20K for divorce petition lawyer's fee. Nonetheless the mediation is not successful in the UK particularly among the Muslim who avoid them because of cultural issues. Mediators are not necessary lawyers, although having a legal background is an advantage. Therefore mediation is not meant for highly controversial or high credited risk couple where issues are complicated. Its aim is to assist couple with straightforward or less complicated claims in order to lessen the burden of the court. 

Since the mediation can be done privately, the UK Muslim Shariah Council (founded in 1984 registered as charity) offers the service to the Muslims. This council also undertake several other extra judicial processes mainly in regards to marriage (nikah), divorce (khul'), maintenance (nafkah) and other family related matters with fees by issuing certificates (for example the khul' fee is GBP400). Being a private institution, the Council has no power to enforce its decision and therefore has no standing in the UK legal system. The observation of the decision is mainly achieved by agreement and willingness of the parties involved. Similarly there is no written procedures to conduct hearings and the session is not presided by qualified or trained legal person. The hearings are informal meetings between the couple to seek advice and the end of the session the mediator or "Kadi" would make pronouncement. Since the the council has no enforcement power, financial settlement has to be brought to the Court. But there are also other concerns such as the hearings has no structural foundations that normally related to legal institution such as accountability, transparency and consistency in making decision. Because of these concerns and others Muslim petitioners prefer to go to the Court directly.  

No comments:

Post a Comment

Pengelakan secara sengaja menjawab soalan dari operator insurans boleh menyebabkan tuntutan pampasan dibatalkan

  CHONG LAI KENG v. PRUDENTIAL ASSURANCE MALAYSIA BHD   [2024] 1 CLJ 293 HIGH COURT MALAYA, SHAH ALAM JAMHIRAH ALI JC [CIVIL SUIT NO: BA-22N...