If you commit a sexual offence in Muslim Iran you're liable to get your gonads removed. If you're convicted here, you're given therapy. Or not, it seems, if you're a Muslim.
Harry Fletcher, the assistant general secretary of probation union Napo, described the situation as an "intractable problem". He said: "The logic is that Muslims cannot take part in offender programmes and therefore their offending behaviour cannot be assessed and they are unlikely to be granted parole. They may then seek legal redress through judicial review on the grounds that they are being discriminated against on the grounds of religion."
I wonder if the prison system in Middle Eastern countries is as sensitive to Christian sensibilities.
26 comments:
So, this is how it works:
1. You are (or claim to be) a muslim, you rape someone and are sentenced.
2. You state you are exempt from certian aspects of your prison sentence because of your religion's 'doctrine'
3. You can then sue the public purse because you will be kept in prison longer, even though it is your own refusual to participate in the process which might see you released which is to blame!
Personally, I say sod what any religion says. This is a secular country and the law is the law and should be applied to all equally.
You cannot pick and choose which laws apply to you.
Failing that, let's use take theopposite view and say "fine, you are a muslim and subject to Sharia law".
What is the punishment for rape under Sharia law I wonder? Bet it aint group therapy!
"The logic is that Muslims will not take part in offender programmes..."
I very much doubt there's a section of their holy book (I can't spell it, so I won't try), which says Muslims are not allowed to take part in sex offence therapy. Is it not just one of those things they make up so they can avoid doing things? Like that M&S shop assistant who refused to wrap up a bible...
They live under British law, not their own law. If they commit sexual offences, they are tried in a British court, sentenced in a British court if found guilty and their sentence is carried out in Britain.
If that includes therapy, that includes "therapy". Because they live in Britain.
Since when did our ancient British law become a smorgasbord?
If the punishment is "against their religion", I would argue that so was the crime. Therefore, we should ship them in batches, handcuffed, so as not to disturb legitimate passengers, to Saudi Arabia, where they can be dealt with by their own religion.
Having provided samples of DNA and a retinal photograph before being shipped off, they would be banned from ever getting back into Britain. As this would occasion their "wives" and children becoming even more dependent on the British state, on the criminal offender's shipment out, they should be shipped off after the prisoners to any country that would accept them and their human rights.
No more hospitality from the working British taxpayer.
The end of the thought fascism (political correctness) is nigh.
All stems from the EUSSR Human Rights Act which B'liar dutifully signed us up for.
Also, throw in the fact that McLabour dont want to "upset" the muslims so want to keep them "sweet" so as not to lose their votes at the next General Election - which they are sure going to need.
This is one moron suggesting it not a policy.
When it's made a policy it would be a story.
The worse part about this is that the general public will either be put at risk by unreformed offenders being released early who are an unknown risk to the public. Or they will be forced to pay more tax to give to the rapists who sue the government for infringement of their human rights.
At the heart here is not Islam but the EU and the charter of human rights.
If England were a sovereign country then it could impose its laws and cultural norms on its people free from interference. It is not and our politicians are lying to us when they claim it is.
Man in a shed: "At the heart here is not Islam but the EU and the charter of human rights."
So? Why are you bowing to "it's not islam"? So what if it were? Their desert belief system is not included under our ancient Common Law. They can accept it or bugger off elsewhere because we will not adjust our ancient and beautiful law that has been copied all over the world.
We will not trim our sails.
(Interesting that the first three code letters to get in to post were god.)
Man in A Shed wrote: "If England were a sovereign country then it could impose its laws and cultural norms on its people free from interference."
Neither England nor Great Britain is a sovereign country. The ancient carpet of your ancient country was pulled out from under you, and you were too feart to object. Bully Tony Blair took all your rights away in the service of ... well, his own mad ego, actually.
Now you have to live with it. You are not British. You are from a "region" of Europe. Which we fought for a thousand years to escape.
You let it happen. And I am glad that I predicted your cowardice and got out.
The unelected - did he ever stand for anything, other than his ugly ego? - Campell who had a bull's yoke around the neck of Tony Blair, directed politics and passage of laws.
And the Fat Wife of Blair got her destructive Yooman Rights law to prevail over our beautiful, fair, ancient Common Law. No one voted for her. But she did it.
The assault against our ancient civilised Common Law, built up through centuries of thought, and its surrender by the communists, is beyond tears.
Adrian Yelland writes: "What is the punishment for rape under Sharia law I wonder? Bet it aint group therapy!"
No, it's not that harsh. I'm astounded that you don't know this. Rape has to be proved by FOUR MALE eye witnesses. What were they doing during the rape, you may well ask, but that is not the point.
Unless four adult males will testify to having witnessed a rape, that rape did not happen. The victim was having sex with a stranger on the street of her own free will and will be put to death.
So no, strangely uninformed Adrian Yelland. It's not "group therapy". It's nothing. Without four adult male witnesses, it didn't happen.
"And I am glad that I predicted your cowardice and got out"
I'm glad you got out too, so is everyone else who lives in this country.
Could we have clarification on this, please, from someone in the know.
In what way could therapy be against Muslim practices? Unless proved otherwise, this does sound as though one 'try-on' has been over-inflated by the media.
Verity - I'm not letting Islam of the hook here. The post on how Islam treats women who suffer rape is stop on. However, the underlying problem is the inability to decide and implement our own laws.
The minority in the country that found our justice system unacceptable could then chose a country which takes human rights more seriously - like Saudi Arabia or Iran ;-)
Iain,
It's as well to remember that very large Muslim communities exist outside of the Middle East. The incidents in Bali etc being a stark reminder.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Muslim_communities
See also Cranmer: http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/ and his latest posting on 'Gay fairytales'...
So Weak Iain.
The original Farmer story in the Torygraph and your own hysterical spin on it are - in my opinion - not fit for purpose.
This is a hypothetical with no quantum. It is a dog whistle of the worst kind. It is fodder for a Nick Griffin broadcast or fiflthy fascist pamphlet.
Analysis explained here.
I cannot understand how anyone in prison can claim that their religion is important to them. They are scrotes. They should have thought about their relationship with the almighty, prior to commiting the crime.
Really Iain, you should read the actual story. It was a suggestion by one person in the prison service, rather than a policy, and the nub of the matter was that Muslims would have to spend longer in prison if they did not go to therapy.
If they are so keen to adhere to the tenets of their religion, then I'm sure the Koran has some suitably gruesome punishment for rapists and sex offenders.
They should be free to refuse therapy just as anyone else should be free to do so, but, like others, they must accept the consequences.
Their religion is neither here nor there.
Stop this pandering and discrimination.
I don't believe it.
This has got to be the last straw for god fearing honest subjects of her majesty.
How dare someone try to swing the lead like this.......it appears to be a deliberate attempt to undermine our judicial/legal system for muslims to gain an advantage.
The koran may not mention group therapy, as when written, rapists would have been hunted down and eradicated. Or rather, the rapee having brought shame on the family would be stoned to death unless she can find 5/6 witnesses, who didn't bother to intervene.
Throw the bastards out and let 'em live in a muslim country, they have no regard for UK law or the mores of our society.
We dont know which aspects of the programme they object to. We should first of all understand what the issues are before we get hysterical.
Why the need to send muslims to Saudi Arabia? They are British Muslims not Saudi Arabian. Do we now expel dissenting British Catholics to Rome?
Adrian Yalland,
If you rape a woman under Sharia then she is punished for adultery. So therapy (for the male) is somewhat academic.
Utterly pathetic and contemptible that religion is getting deferred to. This is 2008, not 2008 BC. We should all be standing up for a secular liberal democracy that protects the individual. No to religious nonsense. Christianity, Islam and all the rest of them should have all their priviliges wiped out now.
Harry Fletcher is making an unwarranted assumption.
Sure, a Muslim who refused to participate in a programme of rehabilitation could apply for judicial review. But judicial review is always, broadly speaking, a discretionary remedy and is most unlikely to be granted in such a case.
Not all judges are bonkers and any Muslim who tried this on would probably get a flea in his ear.
Yet more cases of Brit state blindness...its really rather touching to see Brits completely unaware of what State they're in:
Adrian Yalland:
Personally, I say sod what any religion says. This is a secular country and the law is the law and should be applied to all equally.
Asquith:
This is 2008, not 2008 BC. We should all be standing up for a secular liberal democracy that protects the individual. No to religious nonsense. Christianity, Islam and all the rest of them should have all their priviliges wiped out now.
I invite both of them to go to Northern Ireland and tell the Orange Order.
If they manage to survive more than 30 seconds of the response, I'm sure that they'll be able to tell us by short text message how they suddenly realised that they didn't live in a secular state at all, and never have.
JP, maybe we don't live in a secular state at present. But we should. And I despise the Orange Order and the Church of Rome.
Even 20 years ago, we weren't plagued by various authoritarian believers trying to force the rest of us into line with their unfounded "faith".
Adrian Yelland - I am disconcerted by your ignorance of Islam.
You write: "What is the punishment for rape under Sharia law I wonder? Bet it aint group therapy!"
No! (Exclamation point!) You're right! Unless the rape was witnessed by four males, there was no rape!
Make up your own scenario! A woman being held down and raped by one man has to have her assault witnessed by FOUR MEN, who apparently have nothing else to do but stand around witnessing a rape.
Although, you're right. The punishment wouldn't be "group therapy" because there was no crime, as there were no witnesses, so no punishment.
I know facts are a challenge. But they will serve you well when your impulse is to make an ethncentric judgement which has no resonance with the invaders who are favoured above the owners of the country.
Post a Comment