Will government officials investigate the Islamic Tribunal’s enforcement of Sharia law and bring appropriate action AFTER all the media controversy has dwindled?
Breitbart reported on January 24, 2015 that “an Islamic Tribunal using Sharia law in Texas has been confirmed by Breitbart Texas.”
According the Islamictribunal.org four men who claim to be attorneys and act as judges “handle cases involving Business Disputes, Divorce case, Community Problem, Serious Family Problem, Khula and Family Problems” at 9330 Lyndon B. Johnson in Dallas Texas.
Breitbart Texas spoke with one of the “judges,” Dr. Taher El-badawi. He said the tribunal operates under Sharia law as a form of “non-binding dispute resolution.” El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” A tribunal is defined by Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary as “a court or forum of justice.” The four Islamic attorneys call themselves “judges” not “arbitrators.”
Based upon the information posted at Islamictribunal.org and reported at Breitbart, Florida Family Association has the following concerns:
The Sharia compliant verdicts issued by the Islamic Tribunal may be binding contrary to Dr. El-badawi’s assertions that they are “non-binding.” A report titled A Higher Authority: Judicial Review of Religious Arbitration posted by Emory University contains footnotes on pages 15 and 22, respectively, regarding verdicts issued by the Texas Islamic Court which rebut the tribunal’s claim that their decisions are non-binding:
170 Id. Agreements to arbitrate before a religious panel now commonly include references not only to a particular religious panel, but the address of the particular forum to avoid critiques of ambiguity. See, e.g. , Jabri v. Qaddura, 108 S.W.3d 404, 407 (Tex. App. 2003) (quoting an agreement to arbitrate in the “Texas Islamic Court, 888 S. Greenville Ave., suite 188, Richardson, Texas.”)
In re N.Q., 2-09-159-CV, 2010 WL 2813425 (Tex. App. July 15, 2010) also mentioned the existence of a Texas Islamic Court. In this case, the plaintiff argued that the trial court judge had a “personal vendetta” because of the religious nature of the arbitration agreement, which submitted the parties' claims to arbitration by the Texas Islamic Court.
The four men claim to be attorneys but are not licensed to practice law in Texas.
The four men claim to be judges but have not been granted such authority by the State of Texas.
The Islamic Tribunal is operating as a court. El-badawi said their organization is “a tribunal, not arbitration.” Meriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines “tribunal” as “a court or forum of justice.”
The Islamic Tribunal is relying upon foreign doctrine, Sharia law, which in many cases conflicts with the rights afforded under the United States Constitution and/or violate state and federal law (see list below). One example is the Islamic Tribunal places different requirements on how women seek a divorce compared to men. The wife must first approach an Imam. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
What is the Islamic Tribunal’s position regarding the Sharia obligation to support Jihad? Many followers of Islam hold that Muslims who cannot take on physical jihad must support it with their money. Anwar al-Awlaki's widely distributed and online posted manual titled 44 Ways to Support Jihad states in part on page 13: Preparing for Jihad is obligatory since Jihad today is obligatory and the sharia rule states that: “Whatever is needed for an obligatory act becomes obligatory.” Arms training is an essential part of preparation for Jihad. Allah says: “And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you don’t know but Allah knows” (8:60)
In an interview with CBN, Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. believes greater coercion would follow with the tribunal. "I think what we will see is a coercion of Muslims to participate in this program," said Gaffney told CBN. "[Sharia] is a brutally repressive — very hostile to women, hostile to homosexuals, hostile to Jews, hostile to Christians — kind of totalitarian system."
Irving Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne wrote on February 6, 2015 on her Facebook page "if it's determined that there are violations of basic rights occurring, I will not stand idle and will fight with every fiber of my being against this action."
How many other disparaging provisions of Sharia law are being interpreted in verdicts that violate a woman’s equal protection of the law? Do “Serious Family Problems” or “Community Problems” involve honor violations? If so, what are the verdicts in these cases?
These men should not be holding themselves out to the public as attorneys or judges. The statutes involving such conduct need to be enforced in this situation. However, even if these men dropped the titles of attorneys and judges they still have no authority issuing verdicts based upon numerous provisions of Islamic code that are antithetical to the United States Constitution.
Breitbart reports regarding The Islamic Tribunal brought a lot of media attention to this Sharia court. However, will public officials have the same level of motivation to investigate the activities of the Islamic Tribunal and bring appropriate charges after the media attention subsides and corresponding citizen complaints? Islamictribunal.org has been in existence since May 1, 2013 according to Whois.com.
Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send to express concern about the Islamic Tribunal to the Dallas County District Attorney Susan Hawk, Texas Attorney General Criminal Complaint Division, Supreme Court of Texas’ Unlicensed Practice of Law Committee and Irving Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne.
The email for this article has been deactivated due to time.
District Attorney Susan Hawk
Frank Crowley Courts Building
133 N. Riverfront Boulevard, LB 19
Dallas, TX 75207
Deputy Attorney General Criminal Justice
Office of the Attorney General
P O Box 12548
Austin, TX 78711-2548
Phone: (512) 475-4220
Fax: (512) 474-4570
Supreme Court of Texas’ Unlicensed Practice of Law Committee.
Texas UPL Committee
P.O. Box 12487
Austin, Texas 78711
Irving Texas Mayor Beth Van Duyne
825 W. Irving Blvd.
Irving, TX 75060
P: (972) 721-2410
F: (972) 721-2384
Provisions of Sharia that conflict with American laws.
Sharia law advocates many practices that conflict with the rights afforded under the United States Constitution and/or violate state and federal law including:
Perjury, Muslims are permitted and prompted to lie to non-Muslims.
Discrimination, Muslims are permitted and impelled to discriminate against non-Muslims.
Abolition of adoption rights otherwise granted under American laws.
Abolition of Wills, Inheritance Instruments and Last Testaments established under American laws.
Abolition of certain interest income otherwise specified in loan, mortgage and other borrowing documents.
Diminished rights of women in court. It takes the testimony of two women to equal one man in Sharia court.
Polygamy, Muslim men may marry up to four wives. Muhammad married thirteen women in violation of the Qur'an which he inspired his prophets to write.
Pedophilia, Muslim men can marry girls as young as 14. However, Muhammad took a wife named Ayesha that was nine years old.
Muslim husbands are given the right to beat their wives as a form of discipline.
Severe discipline toward women including isolation, discrimination, full body cover, genital mutilation and beatings.
Savage retribution including amputating limbs and gouging out eyes for crimes like theft.
Barbaric marital punishment toward women including rape, honor killing and public stoning.
The killing of adulterers, homosexuals and Islamist apostates.
Imprisonment and/or execution of blasphemers and non-believers.
Vicious jihad against non-Muslims to establish Islam's rule worldwide. Muslims who cannot take on physical jihad must support it with their money.