In fall 2018, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that insulting Muhammad was not “free speech.” The ruling involved the free speech case of Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (ESW), who had been fined and given a jail sentence in Austria for calling Muhammad a pedophile.
The ECHR “noted that the Austrian courts had held that ES was making value judgments partly based on untrue facts and without regard to the historical context.” Except that Muhammad’s example is still alive and well today, as seen in the prevalence of child marriages in the Islamic world.
The ECHR decision against ESW proved that the court was more committed to the appeasement of Islam than to genuine human rights standards. The fact that Sharia involves such gross violations of human rights showed in her case, as the court succumbed to Sharia blasphemy laws. This raised the question of how much lower the ECHR was willing to go now that it had submitted to Sharia in this precedent-setting decision.
But now, in another groundbreaking decision, the EU Court of Appeal has handed down another decision that can and should set a precedent. This time, it has ruled in favor of a Muslim woman who was appealing to Greek laws against the Sharia, stemming from a case in which Greece applied Sharia in an inheritance matter.
Prior to his death in 2008, Mustafa Molla Sali drew up a will with a Greek notary, in accordance with the country’s civil law, leaving his substantial estate to his wife, including the couple’s apartments and profits from his textile business. Molla Sali’s sisters were left out of the will and contested it, arguing in Greek court that because their late brother was Muslim, his inheritance should be adjudicated in an Islamic court. Under Islamic law, the sisters would receive three-fourths of the estate.
The court ruled in favor of Western law to protect Chatitze Molla Sali’s interest…
The case has been widely watched by legal scholars, as it is one of the first instances of an international legal body ruling on the legality of multiple legal systems operating in the same country. It’s also garnered much attention in Greece, where the parliament passed a law limiting the power of Islamic courts in 2018, including a guarantee that Muslims can have their disputes settled before a Greek civil court.
Not only should Muslims in non-Muslim countries have their disputes settled in non-Muslim civil courts if they choose to do so, but there should also be no Sharia arbitration in any Western country. Equal rights for women are enshrined in Western law; there should be no exceptions.
Sharia tenets and principles have no place whatsoever in Western democracies. Complacency and appeasement are destroying the foundation of Western society.
“Rights Court Orders Greece to Pay Widow in Sharia Law Case,” Courthouse News, June 18, 2020:
STRASBOURG, France (CN) — Chatitze Molla Sali already knew that she’d won the right to inherit her Muslim husband’s full estate two years ago but she had to wait until Thursday to find out just how much the Greek government would have to pay her for illegally denying it to her.
The 13-judge panel at the European Court of Human Rights held that Greece owes the widow more than 50,000 euros ($56,000) for siding with her late husband’s two sisters and for applying “Sharia law to a section of its citizens against their wishes.”
Prior to his death in 2008, Mustafa Molla Sali drew up a will with a Greek notary, in accordance with the country’s civil law, leaving his substantial estate to his wife, including the couple’s apartments and profits from his textile business.
Molla Sali’s sisters were left out of the will and contested it, arguing in Greek court that because their late brother was Muslim, his inheritance should be adjudicated in an Islamic court. Under Islamic law, the sisters would receive three-fourths of the estate.
A lower court sided with the widow, but on appeal Greece’s top court ruled the will was invalid based on 200-year-old treaties between Greece and Turkey.
The high court found that Greek Muslims, a group of around 100,000 who mostly live along the border with Turkey, were governed by the Treaty of Sevres, signed in 1920, and the Treaty of Lausanne, signed in 1923. Both were signed following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after World War I, when Turkey wanted to guarantee the rights of Muslim citizens living on what became the Greek side of the border.
The Greek Supreme Court ordered the dispute to be settled by a mufti, an Islamic jurist.
“Her husband decided the way he wanted his inheritance to be passed on. The Greek court should have respected his desire,” Molla Sali’s lawyer, Yannis Ktistakis, told the Associated Press in 2018….
Mr John L Smith says
Muhammed was a Paedophile how can anyone dispute that; he married a 6 year old girl and raped her when she was nine. And in the UK his followers are following in his footsteps by raping our children
Red Pill says
+1
Halal Bacon says
should have asked the court what their definition of pedophilia is and then proceed to introduce the satan’s cookbook as evidence
mortimer says
Since when does a DEAD political leader have a human right of not being criticized?
If we follow that logic, I may not criticize Hitler, Stalin, Tamerlane, Mao or Pol Pot!
By the above logic, the ruling against Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was totally absurd. The court declared that no one may express an historic opinion or judgement.
But in the current case, the European court is equally wrong. Finally, Greece is being forced to observe its obligations under the Treaty of Sevres which it had virtually ignored in the past. The obligations of the Treaty of Sevres are still in effect.
SAFI says
Mortimer I honestly don’t understand your last paragraph. It is exactly that Treaty which obliges Greece to let muslims have shariah courts. It even says so in the article.
Even that however won’t stop Turkey and the OIC from accusing Greece of persecuting Islam. I say this decision serves the Greeks right for going out of their way to appease the muslim scumbags
James Lincoln says
Let me see if I can get this straight:
The prophet Mohammed, at around 50 years old, married a six-year-old girl named Aisha.
He consummated the marriage when Aisha turned nine years old.
According to Merriam-Webster:
Definition of pedophilia:
: sexual perversion in which children are the preferred sexual object specifically : a psychiatric disorder in which an adult has sexual fantasies about or engages in sexual acts with a prepubescent child
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff correctly called Muhammad a pedophile, using the current definition.
For this, Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff was fined and given a jail sentence for stating the truth.
What is more confusing, is that Islam teaches that the prophet Mohammed was a perfect man. Therefore his pedophilia was part of his being a perfect man.
So why did the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) feel that the expression of this truth would hurt the religious feelings of Muslims and disturb the religious peace in Austria?
This is not logical…
Bikinis not Burkas says
The perfect man, NOT, defective DNA.
Muhammad was WHITE!
http://quranx.com/Hadith/Muslim/Reference/Hadith-2340/
Muhammad was a dwarf and fat!
http://sunnah.com/abudawud/42/154
GreekEmpress says
As an American of Greek descent, I was horrified to read that any court in Greece would apply sharia law to adjudicate a case.
gravenimage says
Yes–so disturbing to see.
SAFI says
For the last century or so Greece has allowed muslims in some parts of the country to have shariah courts (in matters of inheritance and such, not in matters of stoning audulterers) because of the treaties mentioned, which are theoretically still in effect despite the world having moved on, and which are supposed “to guarantee the rights of the muslim minority”.
This is a sensitive issue for Greece because Turkey, the OIC and other islamists are looking for any opportunity to accuse the Greeks of breaking treaties and “oppressing the muslims” (boo-hoo-hoo)
Templer says
The Eu wants to wipe out chirstaintey every chirstsin countrey needs to leave fuck the Eu and islam that’s why the U.K. has left
tgusa says
He deliberately left his sisters out of his will. Probably a reason for that.
tgusa says
His sisters wanted his hard earned money and property. No doubt he wasn’t pleased with the layabouts that his sisters had married. The wife should tell his sisters that if they want money find a more capable man to marry and quit mooching off my dead husband.
gravenimage says
European Court of Human Rights rules against Greece for applying Sharia inheritance laws
……………….
So sorry to see this from Greece–but nice to see a modicum of sanity from the EU. Goodness knows it is a rare enough occurence.
Giacomo Latta says
”multiple legal systems operating in the same country”
What other legal systems does the EU recognize? The I’m-bigger-than-you? The idiot-tax? The not-paying-attention tax? How can any country abandon its own justice system?
OLD GUY says
Sharia Law the future of the world, what a step back in humanity that will be. Freedom loving people need to wake up to the islamic migration invasion taking place right now around the world.
Ivan says
Confusing story at the beginning the Greek court applied the wishes of the deceased and the second part says they were fined for applying Sharia law?? Maybe I missed something
andra says
You should not believe that the Court decided against Sharia because they are against Sharia. Just take in account that you had two different cases that are quoted here.
In the first one a non-muslim lost the case against Sharia. And the second case was only decided for the widdow because she was Muslim as well. If she had been non-Muslim, I bet that she would have lost the case.