German Judge: Koran Allows Wife Beating, no Divorce

[Darth Rotor]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,473017,00.html

I am not sure how credible Der Spiegel is, so perhaps this report is sensationalist. If not, and if it is true, this is what Oriana Fallaci seems to have been going on about in here prediction of "Eurabia" coming in the future. (Yes, friends, one data point does not make a trend.)

What is odd here is the deference to a subculture, specifically a religion within a subculture, when Germany and the EU are generally (and consistently) secular in law and government.

Can any of the Germans on the board offer any insight into this surprising ruling (http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,473017,00.html)?
In January, though, a letter arrived from the judge adjudicating the case. The judge rejected the application for a speedy divorce by referring to a passage in the Koran that some have controversially interpreted to mean that a husband can beat his wife. It's a supposed right which is the subject of intense debate among Muslim scholars and clerics alike. "The exercise of the right to castigate does not fulfill the hardship criteria as defined by Paragraph 1565 (of German federal law)," the daily Frankfurter Rundschau quoted the judge's letter as saying. It must be taken into account, the judge argued, that both man and wife have Moroccan backgrounds.

"The husband can beat his wife"

"The right to castigate means for me: the husband can beat his wife," Becker-Rojczyk said, interpreting the judge's verdict.
And a bit later. (The German law apparently requires a year for a divorce to be granted. Do I have that right, Germans?)
This isn't the first time that German courts have used cultural background to inform their verdicts. Christa Stolle of the women's rights organization Terre des Femmes said that in cases of marital violence, there have been a number of cases where the perpetrator's culture of origin has been considered as a mitigating circumstance -- although such verdicts have become seldom in recent years.
Bismarck wept. (Of course, he might have beaten his wife, for all that I know. :p )

DR

[Kopji]

...On Tuesday evening, Becker-Rojczyk expressed amazement that the judge was still on the bench, given that the controversial verdict was handed down weeks ago. Becker-Rojczyk had elected to go public with the case to attract attention to the judge's conduct. It seems to have worked. On Wednesday, after the Tuesday evening publication of the story on SPIEGEL ONLINE, the attorney received a fax from the Frankfurt court granting the conflict of interest claim and excusing the judge from the case.

Still, it is unlikely that the case will be heard again before the mandated year of separation expires in May. But the judge who heard the case may have to face further consequences for her decision. On Wednesday, numerous politicians in Berlin voiced their horror at the verdict -- and demanded disciplinary action against the judge.
- ibid


Seems like a singular case and action is being taken to remedy it.

[thaiboxerken]

Well, if the woman is Muslim, I don't see the problem here. Perhaps she should reconsider being Muslim.

[PogoPedant]

Maybe the problem has to do with a court ruling on the basis of a book of myths instead of the law of the land?

[Babbylonian]

Well, if the woman is Muslim, I don't see the problem here. Perhaps she should reconsider being Muslim.
And perhaps German judges shouldn't consider "holy books" when rendering legal judgements. Of course, if they require "hardship" in order to obtain a divorce, they're already around the bend as far as I'm concerned.

[The Atheist]

I am not sure how credible Der Spiegel is, so perhaps this report is sensationalist. If not, and if it is true, this is what Oriana Fallaci seems to have been going on about in here prediction of "Eurabia" coming in the future. (Yes, friends, one data point does not make a trend.)

What is odd here is the deference to a subculture, specifically a religion within a subculture, when Germany and the EU are generally (and consistently) secular in law and government.

Der Spiegel is usually highly reputable.

I therefore think it's safe to assume that it's true and if so, I suspect the Judge will shortly end up on the dole queue. You can't go allowing one sector to claim legal immunity under cultural rules - it's an insanity which could only end up with honour-killings being acceptable.

[ZeeGerman]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,473017,00.html

I am not sure how credible Der Spiegel is, so perhaps this report is sensationalist. If not, and if it is true, this is what Oriana Fallaci seems to have been going on about in here prediction of "Eurabia" coming in the future. (Yes, friends, one data point does not make a trend.)

DR

While "Der Spiegel" is very credible, your assessment about "Eurabia" is quite over the top and you stepped on a false dichtonomy. The woman (I mean the judge in question) was simply being an idiot. Had other courts supported her ruling, THEN we might talk about Eurabia becoming more imminent. As it stands, she has been excused from the case and there will be an official examination.
To her defense, she seems to be a bit shaky and overstrained since during an alimony hearing a couple of years ago a guy shot and killed his partner in her office, injured an attorney and the judge was lucky to escape.

Anyway, regarding "Eurabia", even the German council of muslims was very confused about the ruling and stated that the judge should have simply applied German law, period.

Zee

[brodski]

Of course, if they require "hardship" in order to obtain a divorce, they're already around the bend as far as I'm concerned.

By the looks of it they require "hardship" to get a quick divorce, if there is no hardship, you need to wait a year.

[Chaos]

By the looks of it they require "hardship" to get a quick divorce, if there is no hardship, you need to wait a year.

Yep, that´s it. IANAL, of course.

Zee has already said everything else I wanted to say. Danke sehr.

[Rasmus]

By the looks of it they require "hardship" to get a quick divorce, if there is no hardship, you need to wait a year.

That's how I understood it, too.

You can get a divorce - but you need to wait a year - and I think be separated? If enduring that year would mean you'd have to endure "hardship" you can get a divorce sooner.

As I understand the case, the "hardship" was ruled out because a woman should expect a muslim husband to be abusive. Also it seems the couple has been seperated, so his prior abuse might not constituite hardship anymore.

I need to look into things, though, to be sure.

[Beerina]

Maybe the problem has to do with a court ruling on the basis of a book of myths instead of the law of the land?

I find it fascinating a German court (and I do hope "action is being taken to remedy it") finds it OK to beat your wife because you (and your wife's) religion says so, but has no problem throwing people into jail for not paying for taxes for the poor, even though Jesus directly told you to leave other people the hell alone, you do it, not you force others.

I've long since concluded this life is one big joke. I just can't figure out why all the pain and suffering.

[Lonewulf]

I've long since concluded this life is one big joke.

Life may be a joke, but we decide our own punchlines.

[brodski]

I find it fascinating a German court (and I do hope "action is being taken to remedy it") finds it OK to beat your wife because you (and your wife's) religion says so, but has no problem throwing people into jail for not paying for taxes for the poor, even though Jesus directly told you to leave other people the hell alone, you do it, not you force others.

I've long since concluded this life is one big joke. I just can't figure out why all the pain and suffering.

Sorry, are you making a biblically based tax protestor argument?
Have you been channelling Kent Hovind again?
And anyway, render unto Caesar and all that…

[Pardalis]

This is insane. And the worst thing about it is that the judge is a woman! :boggled:

[Mephisto]

Maybe the problem has to do with a court ruling on the basis of a book of myths instead of the law of the land?

Do German courts force people to "swear to tell the truth and the whole truth, so help them Bob," while putting their hand on the Bible?

I can't understand why that is a measure of honesty in America.

[brodski]

This is insane. And the worst thing about it is that the judge is a woman! :boggled:

In what way does the sex of the Judge make the ruling worse?

Is it more OK for a man to approve of domestic violence than a woman?

[Pardalis]

In what way does the sex of the Judge make the ruling worse?

Is it more OK for a man to approve of domestic violence than a woman?

She should at least be more sympathetic to the woman.

I guess idiots come in all shapes and genders. ;)

[brodski]

I guess idiots come in all shapes and genders. ;)

Very true or a s Terry Pratchett said "Just because some one is a member of a minority group, it doesn't stop them from being a small minded, intolerant jerk".

[Katana]

That's how I understood it, too.

You can get a divorce - but you need to wait a year - and I think be separated? If enduring that year would mean you'd have to endure "hardship" you can get a divorce sooner.

As I understand the case, the "hardship" was ruled out because a woman should expect a muslim husband to be abusive. Also it seems the couple has been seperated, so his prior abuse might not constituite hardship anymore.

I need to look into things, though, to be sure.

It sounds like their separation was noted, but the continuing "hardship" was felt to stem from ongoing death threats from the husband.

The husband was forced to move out, but the terror continued: Even after they separated, the spurned husband threatened to kill his wife.

The thought was that a quick divorce might bring an end to the threats.

A quick divorce seemed to be the only solution -- the 26-year-old was unwilling to wait the year between separation and divorce mandated by German law. She hoped that as soon as they were no longer married, her husband would leave her alone. Her lawyer, Barbara Becker-Rojczyk agreed and she filed for immediate divorce with a Frankfurt court last October. They both felt that the domestic violence and death threats easily fulfilled the "hardship" criteria necessary for such an accelerated split.

Sadly, I think that that's wishful thinking.

The more press this gets, the more he may feel that he's suffering public humiliation by his spouse. Sounds like justification for an honor killing to me. :(

[NoZed Avenger]

It's probably too late to stop the momentum built up against the judge and religion in general, but brodski and rasmus appear to be correct: this ruling does not say that it is OK to beat your wife.

As I understand it, a divorce generally requires a one year separation. Avoiding this one year preiod is extremely rare. The court's ruling *only* determined that the one year separation would still apply in this case -- as the couple was already separated, the judge apparently felt that there was no or little chance of violaence -- and that the chance would not be affected whether the couple were still technically married, or not.

That ruling would be based on the showing at the hearing. It may be incorrect, of course, but it does not give the green light to doestic violence and should not be read so.

[brodski]

It's probably too late to stop the momentum built up against the judge and religion in general, but brodski and rasmus appear to be correct: this ruling does not say that it is OK to beat your wife.

As I understand it, a divorce generally requires a one year separation. Avoiding this one year preiod is extremely rare. The court's ruling *only* determined that the one year separation would still apply in this case -- as the couple was already separated, the judge apparently felt that there was no or little chance of violaence -- and that the chance would not be affected whether the couple were still technically married, or not.

That ruling would be based on the showing at the hearing. It may be incorrect, of course, but it does not give the green light to doestic violence and should not be read so.
I agree with all of this, however that said I find this ruling very disturbing, by using the Quarn to support the finding that threats of violence do not constitute “hardship” the judge was saying that Muslims in Germany should be held to lower standards of behaviour, and offered less protection than non-Muslims in Germany.

If the Judge had ruled that death threats don’t constitute “hardship” as defined by the divorce law, and applied hat standard universally that would be one thing, but to use the religion of the parties as a determining factor tells people than in Germany justice is somewhat dependant on your religious beliefs.

Of course with the Religious freedoms Restoration Act the USA leads the western world with religious exemptions from laws.

[Darth Rotor]

Had other courts supported her ruling, THEN we might talk about Eurabia becoming more imminent.


Anyway, regarding "Eurabia", even the German council of muslims was very confused about the ruling and stated that the judge should have simply applied German law, period.

Zee
Thanks for the clarification. "Eurabia" can be characterized as an alarmist meme, but I hope you noted my "one data point does not equal a trend" comment up front.

DR

[Darth Rotor]

I agree with all of this, however that said I find this ruling very disturbing, by using the Quarn to support the finding that threats of violence do not constitute “hardship” the judge was saying that Muslims in Germany should be held to lower standards of behaviour, and offered less protection than non-Muslims in Germany.


I wish I'd said it like that in the OP, that's the key oddity in this case, on first glance.

DR

[Abdul Alhazred]

The German Muslim community is not OK with this.

German judge rules Koran allows wife abuse (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070322/wl_afp/germanyjusticeislam_070322132641) (AFP via Yahoo)

...

The Central Council of Muslims in Germany also condemned the decision.

"The judge should have made a decision based on the German constitution instead of the Koran," said spokeswoman Nurhan Soykan, who said that violence and mistreatment, regardless of the gender of the victim, were also grounds for divorce in the Islamic world.

...

Judge: "But you guys are supposed to be savages. I was trying to be nice to you."

[Rasmus]

Richterin für befangen erklärt (http://www.fr-online.de/frankfurt_und_hessen/lokalnachrichten/aktuell/?sid=552844100dd545d6b8f3a0bd9e2b39fa&em_cnt=1099864)
Judge has been declared biased

Too much legaleese for me in this text to give a translation. All I can gather from this is that a new judge has been assigned to the case.

[Darth Rotor]

Richterin für befangen erklärt (http://www.fr-online.de/frankfurt_und_hessen/lokalnachrichten/aktuell/?sid=552844100dd545d6b8f3a0bd9e2b39fa&em_cnt=1099864)
Judge has been declared biased

Too much legaleese for me in this text to give a translation. All I can gather from this is that a new judge has been assigned to the case.
That seems a rational course of action.

DR

[Abdul Alhazred]

I'm glad it came out OK.

[Chaos]

She should at least be more sympathetic to the woman.

*snip*

If she was sympathetic to the woman, she would be suspended on the spot. Her job is to apply the law objectively, not be sympathetic to somebody.

[strathmeyer]

Still not as a good as the time that Italian judge ruled that it's physically impossible to remove a woman's jeans without her permission so that meant a woman wearing jeans wasn't raped.

[NoZed Avenger]

I agree with all of this, however that said I find this ruling very disturbing, by using the Quarn to support the finding that threats of violence do not constitute “hardship” the judge was saying that Muslims in Germany should be held to lower standards of behaviour, and offered less protection than non-Muslims in Germany.


I think that is a fair point.