The Law Society has withdrawn its guide to drafting Sharia wills after widespread criticism of its advice, which included tips to leave nothing to adopted children and bequeath twice as much to men as to women.
The self-proclaimed "good practice guide" explained to lawyers how they should draft Sharia-compliant wills, but proved controversial. See if you can spot why from these excerpts:
-"the male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir"
-"a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir"
-"Non-Muslims may not inherit at all"
-"only Muslim marriages are recognised"
-"you should amend clauses which define the term 'children' or 'issue' to exclude those who are illegitimate or adopted"
The guide explained that "this means you should amend or delete some standard will clauses", which, broadly speaking, means all those drafted after female suffrage and the enlightenment.
The guide went down like a lead dowry, with the Lawyers Secular Society accusing the Law Society of giving crediblilty to a system which "has a very poor human rights record". There were also concerns that the note seemed at odds with the Society's stated commitment to equality and diversity.
Following its (metaphorical) stoning the Law Soc withdrew its guide this week, and the place to which solicitors could once turn for advice on how to properly disinherit women, illegitimate progeny and the infidel now reads "Page Not Found". Law Society president Andrew Caplen said, "Our practice note was intended to support members to better serve their clients as far as is allowed by the law of England and Wales". Caplen explained that the note had been reviewed and then withdrawn in the light of criticism. "We are sorry", he added.
Tip Off ROF
The self-proclaimed "good practice guide" explained to lawyers how they should draft Sharia-compliant wills, but proved controversial. See if you can spot why from these excerpts:
-"the male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir"
-"a divorced spouse is no longer a Sharia heir"
-"Non-Muslims may not inherit at all"
-"only Muslim marriages are recognised"
-"you should amend clauses which define the term 'children' or 'issue' to exclude those who are illegitimate or adopted"
The guide explained that "this means you should amend or delete some standard will clauses", which, broadly speaking, means all those drafted after female suffrage and the enlightenment.
 |
The Law Society yesterday |
The guide went down like a lead dowry, with the Lawyers Secular Society accusing the Law Society of giving crediblilty to a system which "has a very poor human rights record". There were also concerns that the note seemed at odds with the Society's stated commitment to equality and diversity.
Following its (metaphorical) stoning the Law Soc withdrew its guide this week, and the place to which solicitors could once turn for advice on how to properly disinherit women, illegitimate progeny and the infidel now reads "Page Not Found". Law Society president Andrew Caplen said, "Our practice note was intended to support members to better serve their clients as far as is allowed by the law of England and Wales". Caplen explained that the note had been reviewed and then withdrawn in the light of criticism. "We are sorry", he added.
Comments
71
70
79
75
76
70
Surely what's being objected to in this article and by the Law Society's critics is the belief system itself, which one may want to criticise but it's not for solicitors to refuse to give effect to their clients wishes because they find them distasteful. Have I missed something?
77
73
Nobody is saying that clients can't organise their wills however they like or that solicitors shouldn't give effect to their wishes.
What is objected to is the Law Society issuing guidance on sharia wills, presumably in a completely misguided attempt at "cultural sensitivity".
Who the hell are the Law Society to be interpreting religious "law"? Since when are they in the theology game?
Why is a quasi-public body providing legiticmacy to what is a very nasty ideology?
76
77
76
73
77
80
78
69
80
72
69
80
LawSoc should reveal who was involved in providing advice to draft the guidance. The usual empty vessels claiming to represent "Islam"?
Although I strongly disagree with such a request, I would suggest that those clients who wish to have a Sharia-compliant will in English (not simply a translation of an Arabic document) will need a lawyer who knows that there is some sort of agreed practice.
As other commenters have pointed out, it should be up to the lawyer to remind/notify the client(s) that parts of such a will, if eventually contested, may not meet the prevailing jurisdictional standards in England and Wales.
80
74
That said.. the LawSoc should just f*ck off and keep out of these things. It should stop issuing practice notes of this type altogether.. leave it to conduct type issues and guidance on major points of contention please.
Nice pic btw.