The hysteria which followed Dr Rowan William's comments on Sharia law exposed a worrying ignorance, argues Professor Tariq Ramadan


The storm that followed the Archbishop of Canterbury's statement on Sharia law was both worrying and revealing. Worrying when it became clear people seemed unable to listen to what was really said, and revealing because the use of the loaded word Sharia spread a wave of fear throughout the country and beyond. Let us try to transform this sad story into something from which one can draw lessons for now and for the future.



The Archbishop was not speaking about a parallel system - Sharia law - to be set beside the British legal system. His point was to make clear that there is scope in the latter to integrate some of the provisions Muslims find in Sharia laws. As this is already the case for Christians and Jews - and even for the Muslim community within existing arbitrary Sharia courts - the object is an official, positive recognition of Muslims' presence by respecting their potential needs.



Acknowledging the growing number of Muslims, Dr Williams sees no other way for the British legal system but to be more inclusive. One may disagree with this vision, but it remains necessary to be fair to the Archbishop's actual statement and to stop feeding the debate with unwise passions and fears.



From a Muslim viewpoint, it is possible to draw some important lessons about the state of affairs within both British society and the Muslim community. There is a great deal of ignorance within British society: when one hears the word Sharia, the first images that spring to mind are of cutting off hands or stoning. Moreover, any reference to 'Islamic principles or laws' is heard as Muslims 'do not want to integrate' and are asking for special treatment.



Ignorance, fear and suspicion are setting the scene for the debate. This is so much the case that when Muslims ask for the same rights as other religious communities, they are perceived as trying to change the common system: 'they' are putting 'our' culture at risk. British law offers important scope for religious communities to set councils, courts and contracts on a voluntary basis as long as these institutions or documents do not contradict the fundamentals of the common legislation. An official acknowledgement of these procedures would help to clarify the picture and shed some light on how it is done. Frightened silence or blindness based on ignorance is never good. In times of crisis, it could lead to religious and cultural fractures.



For Muslims, this story has raised important questions and concerns. First, they should make clear - as the great majority have - that they are law abiding and are not asking for a parallel legal system. They can be both fully Muslim and fully British in their commitment to the common law. Second, they have to learn and explain what Sharia is and the different interpretations this concept may have in the classical Islamic tradition. It should be clear there is no question of importing a legal Islamic system from Bangladesh, Pakistan or any Arab country. It is more a case of relying on Islamic scriptural sources in the light of the British environment.



The Islamic legal tradition is very flexible and is not a closed system. The great bulk of British law, equality of citizens, justice, for example, is in accordance with the objective of Sharia and must be integrated as such by British Muslims: this is their Sharia. This is why Muslims - and among them lawyers - must study the British legal system in a deeper way. They will find there is latitude for Muslims to find their way and that this inherent conflict between the two systems is much more in our head than in reality.



Far from the media hysteria, there is a lot to study and still to be done in this field. We need both the wisdom and time to do it.



Professor Tariq Ramadan is a leading Islamic scholar and academic