Legal Pluralism In Australia Essay

Introduction

The introduction of legal pluralism in Australia has been the subject of much debate since the 20th century. Originally the debate mainly centred around the expansion of the law to include Indigenous customary law, which has gained some action in the implementation of Koori courts in Victoria. This debate has shifted over the years to question the possible inclusion of shari’a into the Australian legal system. The debate’s focus has shifted in some part because of the requirements islam makes of adherents to its faith, requirements that encompass all aspects of one’s personal and public life, however similar requirements are made in other religions such as those who practice conservative judaism. The other reason the debate has shifted has been what is termed the ‘clash of

Understanding the debate and determining whether or not shari’a could or should be incorporated into Australia involves examining a number of factors. Firstly understanding the central debate between legal pluralism and legal centralism and how their lasting legal traditions have impacted on multiculturalism. Secondly defining what shari'a is and the requirements it makes. Third understanding how Australia’s context is unique and why this matters in considering the inclusion of shari’a. Fourth examining how shari’a intersects with family law in Australia, and the resulting conflicts. Fifth analysing legal pluralism and its effectiveness in other countries such as Singapore, Canada, the UK and Greece. Lastly the probable benefits and the obstacles to incorporating shari’a in Australia. The right to practice one’s faith is important but given the considerations of the history and flexibility of shari’a, Australia’s secularism, the inequalities in islamic law regarding family matters, and the opinions and diversity of Australia’s muslim population, incorporating sharia into civil law matters would likely only cause system mandated inequalities and put up walls