Posted by
Andrews on Wednesday, July 09, 2008 5:49:09 PM
Let me start by saying that I have been fond of England as long as I can remember. Much of my history degree was spent studying English legal history prior to the Glorious Revolution. So it pains me to say that I see England taking steps that will, over time, lead to the breakdown of society.
One of the best predictors of wealth, even more than economic freedom, is a predictable set of laws. So long as laws are consistent, even with a brutally oppressive regime, economic activity can take place. It is predictability and consistency which make economic activity possible.
So, I am disturbed to see England
moving to allow Sharia law to be used for Moslem citizens. Admittedly, it is not yet official, but the momentum continues to grow, and ti seems only a matter of time before England has a two tiered legal system at least in some respects, with one set of laws for Moslems and another for everyone else.
Now some may ask what the harm is in accepting Sharia for Moslems, it is still consistent, which I said was the important trait.
But it isn't. To a man on the street, the passerby is just a man, not a moslem or non-moslem. No one can tell what his religion is. However, the law views him differently depending on this trait which is not immediately obvious. It may not be important, but it may. And when it comes to economic matters, when I do not know what alws will apply to those with whom I do business, and which will not, that uncertainty can cause me not to act, which leads, inevitably to a decline in the wealth of a nation.
Nor will the law be limited to sharia. Once one group has special laws, all will start to ask for them. Nor will it be limited to family law, it will spread. Before long every imaginable subset of the populace will have its own set of laws, and neither the police nor the citizens will be able to recall what laws apply.
We can see it on a small scale today int he US, where Indian criminals take great pains to be tried in tribal courts as they know they will be treated more leniently than elsewhere. Fortunately it has been limited in the US by being restricted to recognized reservation, but in England it will not be so restricted. By creating what amounts to tribal law for Moslems, and eventually for every ethnic minority, England will create countless groups who expect lenient treatment at the hands of their ethnic or religious brethren.
It is not just the path to becoming a third world nation, but a crime ridden one as well. And unpunished, or leniently punished, crime, when added to the economic problems I mentioned earlier, is a sure path to poverty. Businesses tend to flee crime ridden areas, and even when they don't they tend to suffer losses which slow economic progress. So this crime will serve only to amplify the other harmful effects of embracing multiple parallel legal systems.
Let us just hope this is one foreign precedent the Supreme Court manages to overlook.
POSTSCRIPT
This is but a quick overview of this topic. I wanted to mention this as it has been on my mind, but I don't have the time now for a comprehensive treatment. As I was already planning to write on the importance of legal consistency, perhaps I shall combine the two and use the example of England to show how inconsistency can harm an economy.