Shariah divorce - recent thread and now article in The Times - ‘I must pay my husband ransom to divorce’

[Another2Cats]

So, I was struck by a thread that I came across yesterday "Positive test yesterday, Islamic divorce today":

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/pregnancy/5233026-positive-test-yesterday-islamic-divorce-today

which left me amazed that people just have a religious marriage without also having a legal one.

Then, entirely coincidentally, there was an article in todays Times which shows that this is really quite widespread.

This is the Times article with a share token:

https://www.thetimes.com/article/00986a27-c06a-4f98-a7b7-b3d90c4cf0c3?shareToken=312474580d7f8eeec6fb69b240cfd7a7

Women trapped by sharia: ‘I must pay my husband ransom to divorce’

About 100,000 marriages in the UK are believed to fall under the authority of sharia councils, also known as courts
.

After suffering an onslaught of psychological abuse from her husband and increasingly unhappy in her marriage, Aisha finally decided she wanted a divorce.

There was one problem, however: her husband refused to allow it unless she paid him a five-figure sum covering all the money he spent on her during their marriage.

She offered instead to return her rings but he demanded the money they cost, a sum of thousands of pounds she could not afford.

“I feel like I have to pay ransom to get out of my marriage,” she told The Times.

Welcome to sharia, British style.

Because an Islamic marriage allows polygamy and permits only men to divorce at will, Aisha faces being trapped forever while her husband takes on new brides. The marriage was not officially registered so Aisha has no recourse to English law.

Aisha’s wedding was among 100,000 Islamic marriages estimated to have taken place in Britain and falling under the religious authority of sharia councils, also known as courts.

An investigation by The Times into the use of sharia in Britain has also found:
• A British sharia council states that husbands may dispose of their wives instantly by saying “divorce” three times, a practice banned in many countries in the Muslim world.
• Muslims are being encouraged by another sharia council to download a mobile phone app that creates sharia-compliant wills where daughters inherit half as much as sons.
• The app, aimed at users in England and Wales, has a drop-down menu for men to specify how many wives they have, up to four.
• Women are being asked to disclose when they had their last period in order to get a divorce.
• One of the country’s most prominent sharia councils was founded by a scholar who said men should not be questioned over why they hit their wives.

Britain is seen as the western capital for sharia councils, the informal guardians of religious law over the country’s fast-growing Muslim population.

Home to the first such institution in Europe in 1982, Britain is now expanding sharia services to Muslims overseas.

The Council of Europe, which protects human rights, has expressed concern about Britain’s sharia councils — estimated to number as many as 85 — discriminating against women, and the social pressure upon Muslims to use them.
.

The women

Aisha (not her real name), who is in her twenties, was appalled when Dewsbury’s sharia council entertained her husband’s requests for compensation before setting her free.

Since she lacked the thousands of pounds requested, her husband offered to let her pay in instalments.

“Until I’m officially divorced Islamically, I still believe that I’m married to my husband. It’s hard to comprehend that I’m having to pay this amount just for something that’s spiritual.”

She remains in the marriage but is receiving help from Apna Haq, a women’s support group.

Another woman who struggled to divorce is Shakilla Malik, 45, from Manchester. She told the Karma Nirvana charity she suffered 13 years of domestic violence after being forced at 16 to marry a cousin in Pakistan.

She said the Dewsbury sharia council kept her waiting nearly three years for a divorce when her husband’s brother became involved.

“He wrote a letter to them saying that what a good dad his brother is, what a good husband he’s been, what a good person he was, [that] he prays five times a day,” she said. “This had nothing to do with my brother-in-law. They shouldn’t have given him the time of day.”

The Dewsbury sharia council said: “We understand that emotions can run high and that outcomes may not always meet everyone’s expectations, but our role is to guide couples towards constructive dialogue and decisions.”

A mother in the Midlands obtained a civil divorce after a decades-long arranged marriage to a cousin she wed as a teenager during a visit to Pakistan.

“In our culture and religion, if you don’t get divorced Islamically they say you’re still married. I wanted an Islamic divorce. I went to find somebody in the community … connected to the mosque,” she said.

The go-between made an indecent proposition that she should enter into a “mut’a”, a temporary religiously sanctioned union, sometimes branded a “pleasure marriage” because it enables couples to have sex and then part.

“Apart from my husband, no man has ever touched me. I sobbed my heart out when this guy proposed this to me,” she said.

The woman, in her forties, explained how some Muslim men such as her ex-husband use religiosity to exert patriarchal control over women.

He would demand sex, citing a hadith about Muhammad requiring wives to agree to intercourse even if on a camel’s back or saddle. The saying is used by some scholars to argue that there is no concept of marital rape in Islam.

Tanya Walker, a Tehran-born academic, explained in her book Sharia Councils and Muslim Women in Britain that some women used the councils due to community pressures. One woman said “religion is not important to me”. Another believed in God but not Islam and hated Islamic religious authorities.
.

‘Divorce, divorce, divorce’

While Muslim women in Britain struggle to obtain divorces under sharia, the same is not true for men.

The Birmingham sharia council, part of the Birmingham Mosque Trust charity, explains on its website the concept of pronouncing talaq, the Arabic word for “divorce”. When declared by a husband, it effectively means “I divorce you”.

The council states online: “Men can divorce their wives unilaterally by pronouncing talaq three times either consecutively or on three separate occasions, depending on the Islamic school of thought by which the married couple abide.”

The Times asked Birmingham sharia council why it told couples that Muslim men may divorce in this way when the practice has been banned by 23 countries with large Muslim populations. They include Egypt, Pakistan, Bangladesh and India.

Amra Bone, a panel member, said: “Thank you for highlighting the point on the website. It needs to be explained further that three talaq in one sitting is sinful etc.”

Triple talaq is rejected by prominent Islamic thinkers and scholars. Praising the abolition of the practice in Morocco, Ziauddin Sardar, a former British equality and human rights commissioner and author of Mecca: The Sacred City, described the custom as an absurd convention that had generated much abuse. The Islamic Sharia Council, based in Leyton, east London, told parliament that it refused to accept the validity of triple talaq, which existed in some Muslim communities, as it contradicted all Islamic guidelines regarding divorce.

Khola Hasan, one of the council’s scholars, said: “Triple talaq is really common among the Asian community in Britain.”
.

The article is very long and goes on from here, the above is about half of it. It was interesting to read that Islamic rules vary between countries

We shouldn't have any religious councils in the UK.

Before a Muslim couple marry, the woman sets two dowry amounts. The first one is paid to her immediately upon the marriage contract. The second one is paid by the man to the woman should he divorce her. If the woman wants a divorce, she renounces this amount, she doesn't have to pay it.
This isn't a shariah vs legal issue. Religious Muslims and Jews will primarily turn to religious 'courts' (they are not legally binding at all, so not a true court) for religious reasons, even if they are legally married. Majority of them will not consider a civil divorce to be a religious divorce, so that's moot.

Based on my research and understanding, the title of this article feels like clickbait, distorting a personal experience into an exaggerated claim about Islamic practices. The headline reads, ‘I must pay my husband ransom to divorce,’ which is far more definitive and sweeping than the actual quote: ‘“I feel like I have to pay ransom to get out of my marriage.”

The original quote reflects one woman’s personal feelings of frustration and emotional distress in a specific situation, but the headline presents it as though it is an established or widespread rule under Sharia law. This difference is critical because the quote describes an individual’s perspective, while the headline sensationalises it into a blanket statement that misleads readers into thinking this is a systemic or religious requirement.

Islamic divorce principles, such as khula, do allow women to initiate a divorce, sometimes involving a financial settlement. However, this is meant to be a fair and agreed-upon arrangement, not a demand for arbitrary or extortionate sums. The husband’s actions in this case—demanding thousands of pounds—reflect patriarchal abuse of the system, not Islamic law itself.

Similarly, the mention of mut’a (temporary marriage) in the article is also misleading. From my research, mut’a was historically allowed in specific circumstances, such as during wartime over a thousand years ago. Today, it is not encouraged and is widely regarded as impermissible by the majority of Islamic schools of thought.

The broader issue —unregistered marriages in the UK— points to socio-cultural practices and gaps in legal protection rather than Sharia law. Many women face difficulties because their marriages are not registered under British law, leaving them without legal recourse. Ensuring that religious ceremonies are accompanied by civil registration would provide better protection for both parties.

Similar challenges exist within Orthodox Jewish communities, where only a man can issue a get (religious divorce document), which is required for a religious divorce to be recognised. Women who are unable to obtain a get are often referred to as ‘agunot,’ or chained women, highlighting the power imbalance in certain interpretations of religious law. Jewish communities in Britain also have religious courts, known as Beth Din, which oversee these matters.

The article’s sensationalised framing, such as using a headline like ‘I must pay my husband ransom to divorce,’ misrepresents the complexities of the issue. It’s clear that the problem lies with specific practices, such as those observed in the Birmingham shariah council, rather than with Shariah itself.

Unbelievable. When two people want a divorce, the woman has to pay a ransom to get free? Penalty Shooters

Yes clickbait title and full of misinformation. Nothing new though, a shariah law headline is guaranteed to get engagement.

No this isn't new. Concerns about Sharia Councils have been identified and discussed for years with no action being taken by government. It's been discussed in the House of Lords and parliament.
There is no place for religious courts that do not abide by the basic tenets of human rights.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/sharia-in-the-uk-the-courts-in-the-shadow-of-british-law-offering-rough-justice-for-muslim-women-a6761221.html

https://www.secularism.org.uk/opinion/2024/05/we-must-stop-ignoring-the-elephant-in-the-religious-court-room
Dr Bano described how the sharia councils provide a service to women seeking an Islamic divorce. An uninformed listener might wonder why it is only women that need this service. The answer is that under sharia, a man has a unilateral right to divorce his wife. This can be done by saying "I divorce you" three times. A man might ask a sharia council to provide documentation of his divorce, but he does not need their permission. A woman needs either her husband's consent or the approval of a religious judge. She has no automatic right to divorce. Thus, the remedy provided to women is based on a patriarchal religious tradition.The Islamic Sharia Council, which worryingly is a registered charity, used to have a helpful explanation on its website of the reasons for the difference in treatment between men and women:"For example, the right of divorce is vested in the hand of the man while she is allowed to ask for divorce either directly or through a Qadi (Judge). Why? Because the women are kind-hearted human beings who are governed by their emotions, a character strongly needed for bringing up the children. On the other hand, man is governed by his mind more than his emotions. He would think twice but more than that before uttering the word "Talaq"

My mother in law is orthodox jewish and was legally married. Under jewish law, she needs a get (or permission) to be divorced in the faith. The consequences are that if she doesn't do that and has a new partner that would be viewed as adultery.

FIL hadn't worked for years, MIL always paid the mortgage but he said he was entitled to part of the family home (they had 4 children aged 10 to 18 all of whom were still in education and who were being solely supported by MIL) as he had paid for the first flat with savings and the family home with money from both sets of grandparents. The family home is a terraced in London so worth quite a bit even in 2009 (just after financial crisis). He said he wouldn't grant a get unless MIL gave him 100k (25% of the house value at that time, worth a lot more now) . MIL remortgaged, got money from her father to pay him out and got her get. She only just stopped paying her mortgage last year as a result of the divorce. I do read about cases like xenia who also had expensive divorces and many children(husband was significantly poorer) but the fact is FIL was trying to use religion to get more than his fair share. He still thinks he would have gotten more if they made it to the divorce courts (told my DH this), MIL chose to settle..

Dh is now NC with his father for obvious reasons, he went off to southeast asia with the money and now has a new wife. My point though is that this isn't just an islam thing.

From the Independent article. This sounds interesting, especially as we have no fault divorces now. No man whatever their religion should be able to hold a woman in 'marital captivity.'

Zee will launch her book at an event organised by libertarian think-tank, the Henry Jackson Society, in the Houses of Parliament on 12 January. She is calling on the British government to introduce new laws to help women access the criminal and civil courts for religious divorce, as in the Netherlands, where in 2010 Dutch-Pakistani woman Shirin Musa won a precedent-setting civil case.

There, a judge imposed damages upon Ms Musa’s husband for each day of non-compliance with the court’s ruling that he had to release her from the religious marriage. He instantly did, and in 2013 “marital captivity” became a criminal offence.

The problem isn't just the civil courts. You can get a civil divorce but if your religion doesn't recognize your divorce you are still 'trapped'.

Firstly it's the man refusing the divorce.
'A woman needs either her husband's consent or the approval of a religious judge. She has no automatic right to divorce.'

The civil court would hold the husband accountable for not agreeing to divorce.

Although I think religious courts shouldn't be allowed to operate as charities and be accountable for upholding human rights and respecting the law of the land (as in reporting abuse.)

I believe the word “talaq” can only be said in 3 separate occasions. I don’t think that’s correct that a woman needs her husband’s consent to divorce? But from what I’ve been reading, I believe a reason is needed to be provided to keep the family unit intact.

It's complicated and there are different procedures. The real issue is how sharia courts and individual judges operate. There are no overall supervision or codes of practice for the courts. Judgements can vary wildly.

There are different approaches which with liberal Muslims work well, the problem is with tradtionalists

https://www.slaterheelis.co.uk/articles/divorce-family-law-category/islamic-divorce-guidance-uk/

Islamic Methods of Separation
Either party can initiate an Islamic divorce. However, different procedures are followed depending on whether the husband or wife initiates the divorce. It also depends on whether the marital contract (Nikah) has been adhered to throughout the marriage.
There are four main methods of separation in Islam:
Talaq: This is when the husband initiates the divorce. In this instance, the husband breaks the contract and must pay the Mahr. The Mahr, also known as a dowry, is paid in full to the wife only.
Khula: This is when both parties have mutually agreed to separate. While the Khula is typically initiated by the wife, the husband and wife agree on the divorce terms.
Faskh-e-Nikah: This is the dissolution of an Islamic marriage pronounced by a Sharia court, initiated by the wife. This type of divorce is sought if the husband and wife do not mutually consent to divorce or the husband refuses to give Talaq. In Islam, it is prohibited for a husband to unreasonably refuse to grant Talaq, so a Faskh enables the wife to seek divorce in this circumstance.
Tafweedh-e-Talaq: This is when the power of Talaq is transferred to the wife. Under English law, neither party has the power to grant a divorce. It is instead in the hands of the Judge. Islamic law puts the power in the hands of the man or the woman, depending on the type of separation used. The Tafweedh-e-Talaq is when the husband agrees to transfer his power of Talaq, allowing the wife to have that same right.

It doesn’t legally, but if people believe in religion and haven’t had a legal UK ceremony this sounds more of a cultural issue.

Surely any religion that treats you so badly isn’t one you’d want any part of? These women (if they have the financial means) could leave, but I think that culturally they feel they can’t and possibly are financially dependent on their husbands.

How depressing all round.

If you are a practicing muslim then I imagine it’s really important to you that you have a religious divorce. It’s really distressing because even if you have a civil marriage you would still require an islamic one as a believer to get it done and dusted. It’s a recipe for abuse that believers can’t disentangle themselves from.

Honestly these systems are set up to uphold men’s entitlement. The fact that a Sharia court would even entertain a 100k pay off says a lot about them. I remember reading about a rabbi who would basically grant any woman who asked him for a divorce a divorce. I liked that man very much.

I don’t think enforcing a civil marriage would make a difference. I think you have to regulate these. Even if the courts were banned you would probably still need an imam to dissolve the marriage. I’m not sure that many muslim women would want them to eb banned either, they may just wish they were fairer. It would be great if we had an imam who just handed out a divorce with no conditions to any woman who wanted one.

My mother in law wasn't dependent on her husband financially, actually her husband was dependent on her. But she was still 'trapped' in marriage as a White European woman until she paid out.

https://www.jwa.org.uk/our-services/how-can-jwa-help/get-refusal-and-forced-marriage/

A Gett is the Jewish document of divorce. Following a civil divorce, the husband is required to give his wife a Gett, and the wife is required to receive it. This process is usually facilitated through the Beth Din (Jewish court), enabling both parties to remarry in a synagogue.

Gett refusal occurs when one partner – often the husband – refuses to grant the Gett, effectively ‘chaining’ the other partner. In Jewish terminology, a woman in this situation is called an agunah, meaning a ‘chained’ woman. Some women remain in this state indefinitely.

Gett refusal is a form of abuse. Perpetrators of domestic abuse sometimes use Gett refusal to extort money from their ex-wife’s family in exchange for the document.

But you do need to enforce a civil marriage. I know first hand people whose "husbands" we not actually legal husbands and thus has left them in difficult circumstances when they split. Anyone who get married under any religion should be forced to have it registered otherwise people are left vulnerable

Also within a religious environment some don't even seem to realise they were not married under their eyes of uk law

What would’ve happened if she denounced her faith? Not suggesting that’s necessary easy, but I would struggle personally to remain faithful to a religion that kept me ‘trapped’ like this in this day and age.

The thing is most Jewish people (including religious orthodox types) do regard it as reprehensible for a man to refuse a gett. But it is halakcha (Jewish law) that it is done this way. There are lots of talk about creative solutions to sidestep the halakcha but not sure how much progress has been made.

In Israel they have managed to jail some of these men for gett refusal and men who refuse getts are barred from entry to Israel.. Just that you know men who refuse getts tend to be v stubborn and not quite normal, there are men sitting in jail who still refuse to grant a gett.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.timesofisrael.com/longest-jailed-israeli-divorce-refuser-freed-after-19-years/amp/

Somehow after 19 years in jail this idiot still refused to divorce his wife.

Ok but if the divorce is a ceremonial and non legal one and people generally regard it as reprehensible then why don’t women just ignore it and go about their lives? They aren’t legally tied to their ex husbands any more, they could walk away.

A religious viewpoint isn’t a law in this country, it’s a cultural belief and people are free to change their beliefs.

In the diaspora, the women who need a gett are generally orthodox women. If they don't get a divorce they cannot marry again in the faith. Any children born subsequently would be mamzer (illegitimate). Mamzer can't marry any jewish person other than converts and other mamzer so any children would be subsequently exiled from their community. When my SILs made aliyah the first thing the israeli government asked for was their parents ketubah (marriage contract). That is the proof they are Jewish and eligible to move to Israel. It is also what enabled them to marry in jewish weddings. This affects the next generation too. Yes you can say they can just get a civil marriage somewhere else but a child who has grown up in this community wants to be part of that community. That's the contradiction, peoppe think it's reprehensible that the guy doesn't grant a gett but they still don't want their kids marrying a mamzer, so what happens if the woman wants to move on with her life.

Also for these women their religion is their world..they don't use electricity on shabbat they keep strict dietary requirements. Majority of their social circle tends to be other jewish people (generally similar level of religiosity).

I mean I am liberal jewish and we don't have getts in my denomination (and women can be rabbis). Yet somehow we are still a minority in the uk, most jewish women in the uk still identify with the orthodox movement (including non religious women) which does require getts so there are probably complex reasons for this. Nothing stopping them from mass switching but this hasn't happened yet.

@Winter2028 the inherent problem with all religion is that they find so many ways to control women, I’m so glad I’m not part of organised religion but accept it’s not easy to walk away from your entire community when this way of thinking is so ingrained.

Why can't she just ignore him or say "divorce, divorce, divorce" and walk away? They were never legally married, he doesn't have any real hold over her.
If anyone bothers her about a non-binding religious ceremony, police should act.