Further Critique: Cases Relating to Criminal Law

As indicated above, one major allegation against mat as well as shari^ta coun­cils which is made not only by the media^w7 but also by members of the House of Lords and primarily Baroness Cox, is that these institutions are, “deciding cases relating to criminal law, such as those involving domestic violence and grievous bodily harm.”i6⁸ Cox addresses the abovementioned concern against, “Muslim arbitration tribunals” in one sentence and in the next quotes the Home Secretary in that there was evidence of women being forced to stay in abusive marriages by “Sharia councils'⁹*’⁹ - again not differentiating between the institutions.

The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal did not deny handling cases which in­volve domestic violence. In 2012 Siddiqi stressed that in such cases they work together with the police and get social services involved, but that it was always up to the victim to press charges against the offender. mat would help and empower a victim to do so and ensure that it has full, “option to pursue the criminal proceedings”.^{[169] [170] [171] [172] [173] [174] [175] Siddiqi claimed, however, that most women did not want to go to the police or had already been there but would prefer not to press charges because they knew this was going to end their relationship including possible disruptions of further family ties. They would instead ask a solution from mat, wanting the domestic violence to stop. On that account, mat would use mediation in such cases which could be shuttle mediation, i.e. featuring separate meetings. They would furthermore support the victim personally and by facilitating and ensuring the acceptance within and backing of the com­munity. At the same time mat would use community pressure and control on the offender in order to prevent further violence.^ In an interview with Elham Manea, Siddiqi further stated that they would not only try to monitor the situ­ation themselves, but ask the community in the area of the clients to watch victim and especially offender in order to make sure that no further violence occurred.}

At the end of 2017, mat could according to its website - after helping victim and offender to reach reconciliation - pass on, “[t]he terms of such a recon­ciliation [...] to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) through the local Police Domestic Violence Liaison Officers with a view to reconsidering the criminal charges.”i75 Although obviously, “the final decision to prosecute always remains with the CPS”,i7⁶ this was one of the points that could raise further criticism for being an obstruction of punishment. It thus seemed odd that mat claimed to be neutral and empowering victims to stand up to the wrong they suffer and on the other hand offered to get involved with the CPS aiming to possibly avert criminal charges, even if they were acting upon the explicit and voluntary re­quest of the victim. In October 2018 the respective statement had vanished from mat's website, which now clearly stated that “[i]ssues relating to domes­tic violence are dealt with by the Crown Prosecution Service (cps) through the local Police Domestic Violence Liaison Officer. mat offers mediation to parties wishing to find solutions to their problems.”^{[176] [177] [178] [179] [180]}

The decision to prosecute is in any case dependent on the evidence and on public interest as well as the interests of the victim. According to the Code for Crown Prosecutors, “prosecutors should take into account the views expressed by the victim about the impact that the offence has had. In appropriate cases, this may also include the views of the victim's family."™ For this reason it would be important to assure that victims are not under pressure when giving evidence.

Cultural or religious beliefs may also be a deterrent for victims coming forward; victims may feel ashamed by their community, or may fear isola­tion by the community. Additionally, community leaders or faith leaders in some cultures or ethnic groups may play the role of a mediator and discourage the victim from reporting. Prosecutors should be sensitive to cultural issues which may take the form of mediation, as well as certain practices which some cultures exercise. Cultural and religious practices should be respected to a point; however, they should not be seen as an ‘excuse' to cover domestic abuse between partners or family members.™

Although it is not known whether and to what extent mat actually got or may still get involved with the police or the CPS in this sense, the latter are prompt­ed to be alert as well as respectful to the practices of institutions like mat.

Furthermore Siddiqi is very clear that in “extreme” cases, where they see no chance that the violent behaviour is going to stop, they would urge the victim to press charges or at least free themselves of the situation by leaving the of­fender. The same applies for violence against minors, especially if executed by a family member, where mat would get social services involved in order to assure immediate prevention of further violence?⁸⁰

In cases where a court order is in place, parties, “should not even be here",181 Siddiqi says. The only service provided by mat in such cases would be an

Islamic divorce or marriage dissolution which would be done without any fur­ther consideration, as reconciliation was unthinkable per se.

8