Austrian Court Rules Sharia Law Legally Binding in Civil Disputes

A recent ruling from an Austrian court has determined that Sharia law can be considered a binding legal framework in civil disputes, provided that both involved parties agree to its application. This decision has triggered significant alarm over its potential to disrupt the moral fabric of the nation.

In a specific case, two men had entered into a contract that specified any disputes would be settled through an arbitration tribunal based on Islamic law. The tribunal ruled that one plaintiff was required to pay a considerable sum, leading him to challenge the legality of applying Islamic law in a secular court. He argued that the interpretation of Islamic law is subjective and claimed this application contradicted Austrian law. Despite these objections, the Vienna Regional Court upheld the arbitration's ruling, asserting it did not violate Austria's fundamental values and recognized the validity of Islamic legal provisions in property agreements.

The decision was met with severe criticism, especially from politicians such as Michael Schilchegger of the Austrian Freedom Party, who lamented the ruling as a detrimental shift for Austria's secular constitution. He expressed that it could encourage the rise of political Islam within the country and give further legitimacy to Islamic parallel societies. Similarly, fellow party member Manfred Haimbuchner decried Sharia law, stating it contradicts Austria's moral standards and legal principles. Additionally, the Turkish Cultural Community in Austria voiced its discontent, asserting that the ruling contradicts a prior judgment from the European Court of Human Rights, which had previously prohibited the imposition of a parallel legal system based on Sharia law. General secretary Melissa Gunes cautioned that this ruling could lead to broader implications for secular governance beyond just legal disputes.