The Future of Legal Pluralism

Abstract

Any discussion of the role of the Shari’a in the West can be understood within the broader question of legal pluralism, that is the role of different legal systems within a sovereign state. In this volume (and this concluding chapter), we considered the evolution of the Shari’a and legal pluralism within three historical contexts namely imperial systems such the Ottoman Empire, under various forms of colonial rule such as the British colonial power in India and Africa, and finally the prospects for legal pluralism and acceptance of the role of the Shari’a in liberal democracies. In the majority of the colonial settlements the issue of aboriginal law has become a political as well as a legal question. Globalization and the movement of migrant labour and refugees increase the diversity of societies and eventually raise questions about legal pluralism. Opposition to the Shari’a has often been driven by widespread Islamophobia, but, as in the case of the United States, the constitution of a sovereign state presents a substantial obstacle to legal pluralism. These obstacles are often based on a misunderstanding of the nature of the Shari’a which is not state law but a general guide to the religious life. The second misunderstanding is that the use of the Shari’a often takes place within a tribunal dealing for example with matrimonial disputes. In popular newspapers in the West, tribunals are often confused with courts.