The report found that 61 percent of couples who underwent Islamic ceremonies failed to go through a separate civil ceremony recognised by family courts.
It essentially means that if the marriage breaks down as a result of an inamicable split, women in such unions can often be left with no assets.
One woman in such a predicament in Britain told The Times: “My husband refused to pay (child) maintenance and I couldn’t get the house we’d bought, although the majority of the money used to pay for it — 80 percent — was mine.
“I couldn’t claim more than 50 percent because we were viewed as co-habitees. I had to move in with my parents and I’ve spent £100,000 on legal costs. The government needs to change the law so that everybody who has a religious ceremony must also have a civil ceremony.”
But in Manchester, the Wuzara Ulama sharia council, only functions to grant divorces to women trapped in bad Islamic marriages they say.
Maulana Ejaz, the cleric from Dewsbury who heads the Council, confirmed to The Spectator that in northern England where he operates, some 60 per cent of Muslim marriages are not registered under English civil law — which renders the English legal system powerless in Muslim divorce proceedings.
The Muslim women in Manchester all believe the Wuzara Ulama — who do not charge for their services — actually defend the rights of women.
It is clear that Muslims have set up a parallel legal system that challenges and subverts the ancient principle of “one law for all” laid out by Magna Carta in 1215.
Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage says there are more than 80 sharia courts in the UK. “Big ghettos” where the authorities “turned a blind eye” out of “moral cowardice” were being tolerated, Farage complained.
Lord Cromer, the British vice consul of Egypt had voiced concern in the 20th century already that the “degradation” of Muslim women had had a harmful effect on society. But a “postcolonialist feminists” argue that if Muslim men give the appearance of treating women badly, the oppression these men have suffered at the hands of white colonial masters is to blame.
Columbia professor and “feminist” Gayatri Spivak has dismissed Western concerns about women’s rights, saying it amounted to “white men saving brown women from brown men”.
Another “feminist” Miriam Cooke, a Duke professor and head of the Association for Middle East Women’s Studies, asserted that brown men were subjected to a new form of imperialism. “When men are traumatized [by colonial rule], they tend to traumatize their own women.”
Cooke added: “Polygamy can be liberating and empowering” because women could become adulteresses by engaging new lovers. When asked about the sharia punishment of stoning for such transgressions, Cooke shrugged: “I’m only interested in discourse.”
