Tunisia’s Lawmakers Reject Sharia Law

Last year Russian President Vladimir Putin was rumored to have rejected proposed Sharia (Islamic) law for Muslim Tunisia flagminorities in Russia saying that Muslims who want to live by Sharia law can go to states where such Sharia is the state law. Whether truth or fiction, chances are Russia will continue to hold on to its state law for all its citizens – and that is not Sharia Law for sure.

There is some interesting development in Tunisia meanwhile as the country’s legislative assembly has rejected Sharia Law in favor of civil law. Russia Today reports that among the new articles adopted by the constituent assembly in Tunisia, two articles specify Tunisia as a civil republic while letting Islam to remain as the state religion.

Human rights activists have welcomed this development in Tunisia as tells the story on Russia Today. According to a latest Fox News story, the Christian community in North African region is seriously concerned over the news of Libya’s new constitution possibly based on Sharia law.

  •  
    6
    Shares
  • 6
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

1 comment for “Tunisia’s Lawmakers Reject Sharia Law

  1. January 7, 2014 at 9:09 pm

    Any country trying to prosper, in or part of the twenty first century, wish to be in any way referred to as applying a law that a caravan in the desert might shy to.
    Homosexual sex is illegal under sharia law, though the prescribed penalties differ from one school of jurisprudence to another. For example, only few Muslim-majority countries impose the death penalties for acts perceived as sodomy and homosexual activities.

    Sharia judicial proceedings have significant differences with other legal traditions, including those in both common law and civil law. Sharia courts traditionally do not rely on lawyers; plaintiff sand defendants represent themselves. Trials are conducted solely by the judge, and there is no jury system. There is no pre-trial discovery process, and no cross-examination of witnesses. Unlike common law, judges’ verdicts do not set binding precedents[85][86][87] under the principle of stare decisis,[88] and unlike civil law, sharia does not utilize formally codified statutes[89](these were first introduced only in the late 19th century during the decline of the Ottoman Empire, cf. micelle).
    The rules of evidence in sharia courts also maintain a distinctive custom of prioritizing oral testimony.[90][91]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.