Badges of Trade

...

The model to be proposed will be premised on the legal framework of dispute resolution in the Sharī‘ah courts in Malaysia and Singapore. Sulh and Tahkim are special ADR procedures recognised and practiced in the Sharī‘ah courts in Singapore and Malaysia.[12] In addition, there are provisions for Tahkim in the Kuala Lumpur Regional centre for Arbitration in Malaysia where specific rules were made for Islamic banking disputes.[13] The successful implementation of Sulh and Tahkim processes in Malaysian and Singaporean courts have won far-flung admiration and respect for the administration of justice system in the Sharī‘ah courts.

In Malaysia, Islamic law matters fall within the scope of the legislative powers of the States.[14] Art. 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia provides that the Sharī‘ah Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over Islamic law matters.[15] Hence, different States, including the Federal Territory, in Malaysia have their respective enactments on the jurisdiction of the Sharī‘ahh courts. As a consequence of that, the Sharī‘ah courts of different States have their own respective Sharī‘ah Court Rules made pursuant to the enabling enactments. Most of our discussion in this research will be centred on the Sharī‘ah Court Civil Procedure (Sulh) (Federal Territories) Rules 2004 which was made pursuant to Section 247 (1) (c) of the Sharī‘ah Court Civil Procedure (Federal Territories) Act 1998.[16]

Though the Sharī‘ah Court in Singapore was established in 1955, the court derived its jurisdiction from the Muslims’ Ordinance which came into effect on 30 May 1957. In 1966, the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) was enacted which repealed the Muslims’ Ordinance. Islamic law matters particularly family law issues in Singapore are now governed by AMLA under which the Sharī‘ah Court in Singapore is presently operating. This Act was revised in 1999 to further enhance the administration of justice system. The coming of AMLA tremendously enhanced the system of administration of justice in the Sharī‘ah Court in Singapore. The establishment of the Sharī‘ah Court by the President of Singapore is provided for in Section 34 of AMLA[17] while section 35 provides for the jurisdiction of the court.[18] A relevant section to this research is section 50 which provides for the appointment of hakam (arbitrators) in marital disputes. The hakam will endeavour to effect a reconciliation between the parties and submit the award to the court for registration. However, going through the court process, there are several stages through which disputants must pass in settling the dispute. The hybrid process consists of the following stages: Registration, Counselling stage, Summons stage, Mediation stage, Pre-trial Conference stage, Trial stage, Hakam stage, and the Appeal stage.[19] This hybrid process has been very reliable among disputants and it has gained wide recognition in Singapore.

According to the Sharī‘ah Court, the objectives of mediation (Sulh) are:

- To help parties reach a divorce settlement within a shorter time. Parties wishing their matter to be settled at the mediation stage must reach agreement on the following issues:

- Divorce.

- Payment of nafkah, iddah and mut'ah.

- Custody of children.

- Division of matrimonial property.

- To dispense with a Court hearing which may have an undesirable effect on the children.

- To help parties have a better understanding of issues relating to divorce so that they will make proper decisions.

- To help parties save cost if their matter can be settled at the mediation stage.

- To make it easier for matters relating to children and matrimonial property to be discussed and resolved should these arise after the divorce.

- To avoid dissatisfaction between parties in that the decision to divorce is their own and not the Court's.

- To save parties from washing dirty linen in public.[20]

If an agreement is reached at this stage, the mediator will prepare a consent document to be agreed upon by the disputing parties. The consent document will be registered in the court as a judgment and as such, the case has been finally determined. On the other hand, if no settlement is reached at the mediation stage, the case will be transferred to the Pre-trial Conference. Meanwhile, by virtue of Section 145, the power to make rules for the Sharī‘ah Court is vested on the President of Singapore, though section 146 allows him to delegate all or any of such powers vested in him to the Minister or President of the Sharī‘ah Court.

Against the above backdrop, this research will consider the possibility of introducing the ADR processes recognised in Islamic law into the legal framework of courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria through a total overhaul of the relevant court rules. A significant contribution of this research is the drafting of new rules of court for the courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria. It is however important to mention that it is only a new Sharī‘ah Court of Appeal Rules that will be drafted. Though this research will not draft new Rules of Court for the subordinate and superior courts to the Sharī‘ah Court of Appeal having Sharī‘ah jurisdictions, efforts shall be made to propose possible review of the relevant provisions in the said rules since the administration of justice system in Nigeria is hierarchical based on the common law model.

The future of ADR within the Islamic law context lies in dispute avoidance. This is the reason why this research examines the feasibility of Dar al-Ifta‘ within the Nigerian legal system to promote dispute avoidance among the Muslim communities. In addition, Muslim communities should be ready to apply these rules in the resolution of their disputes. Therefore, the quality of court-connected ADR processes has to be ensured to achieve its objectives. There is need for a well-structured training programme for the judges in courts with Sharī‘ah jurisdiction in Nigeria on the ADR processes in Islamic law to facilitate the dispute resolution process. It is hoped that even the Islamic law panels of the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court will consider the ADR option even in cases on appeal. This is being practiced in the United Kingdom,[21] so it is nothing new, as Islamic law encourages amicable settlement of disputes at any stage of the case. These ambitious reforms will