Timeline

Baroness Cox writes a public letter to Home Secretary Suella Braverman, requesting a commitment from the Government to provide a legislative solution to the injustice suffered when women in England and Wales unknowingly enter into religious marriages that offer them no legal protection. The letter received cross-party support, and was signed by 13 members of the House of Lords.

Equal and Free publishes a new Briefing Paper: A Decade On: Still Not Equal. Still Not Free. This paper examines the issue of religious-only marriage as it relates to the discriminatory divorce experiences of many Muslim women in the UK, and highlights the last eleven years of Equal and Free's work to try to ensure that these experiences are not repeated.

The Law Commission publishes their recommendations for weddings law reform, proposing an overhaul of the current buildings-based model of weddings law in favour of an officiant-based system. While these recommendations would not resolve every case of religious-only marriage, they could be capable of drastically decreasing the number of non-qualifying wedding ceremonies (ceremonies with no legal consequence) taking place in the UK. Their proposals would increase the number of marriages that could be considered ‘void’ rather than ‘non-qualifying,’ affording individuals the protection of regulated legal processes rather than forced reliance on sometimes deeply discriminatory religious divorce proceedings. Read about the Law Commission’s Celebrating Marriage: A New Weddings Law Report below.

Baroness Cox re-introduces her Private Member’s Bill into the House of Lords. The Marriage Act 1949 (Amendment) Bill seeks to amend Section 75 of the Marriage Act 1949 and create an offence of purporting to solemnise a marriage (leading a wedding ceremony) that has not been, and will not be, legally registered. Essentially, the amendment would require all couples taking part in a religious marriage to legally register their union before or during the religious ceremony.

Baroness Cox releases a response to the Nuffield Foundation’s Final Report: When is a wedding not a marriage? Exploring non-legally binding ceremonies. The report, published in March 2022, aimed to “investigate why marriage ceremonies occur outside of the legal framework for weddings in England and Wales.” Baroness Cox commends the report for giving the issue of legally-unregistered marriage the scrutiny it so desperately needs, but draws attention to key weaknesses in their examination of religious-only Muslim marriage – weaknesses that have the potential to hinder the cause of providing proper legal protection to married British Muslim women.

A BBC Radio 4 Sunday Discussion between Roxana Rais, Chair of the Muslim Women’s Advisory Council, and Professor Russell Sandberg of Cardiff University highlights the continued failure of current Marriage Law to meet the challenge of widespread religious-only marriage. They discuss possible legislative solutions and the Law Commission’s provisional recommendations for increasing the number of legally registered marriages. The discussion begins at 10:13.

The Muslim Women’s Advisory Council creates a petition calling for the Nikah (Islamic wedding ceremony) to be recognised as a legal form of marriage. This would give Nikah ceremonies the same legal status as Church of England, Church in Wales, Roman Catholic, Jewish, or Quaker ceremonies. Follow the link below to lend your support to this important petition.

Baroness Cox writes a letter to the Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP, Secretary of State for Justice, highlighting the continued plight of women in Religious-only marriages and requesting a response to a statement from the Grand Mufti of Egypt, calling the legal registration of Islamic marriage a “necessity.”

Baroness Cox submits a proposal to the Special Inquiry Committee, urging Parliament to prioritise Muslim women who do not (yet) have the protection of legal marriage.

Baroness Cox re-introduced her Private Member’s Bill into the House of Lords. The Bill – the Marriage Act 1949 (Amendment) Bill – seeks to improve Muslim women’s access to marital rights and benefits.

Following an Oral Question from Baroness Cox, members of the House of Lords discuss the lack of progress towards the Government’s commitment to “explore the legal and practical challenges of limited reform relating to the law on marriage and religious weddings”.

Law change urged to protect women from rise of Sharia courts.

A cross-party letter is sent to the Law Commission, welcoming proposals to protect women in sharia-compliant marriages (who have had a religious wedding ceremony but without legal consequences) and challenging the Government’s “unwillingness to protect one of this country’s most marginalised, excluded and discriminated-against groups”.

The Ministry of Justice is challenged by members of the House of Lords to introduce legislation “as a matter of urgency” to protect couples in religious-only marriages.

Baroness Cox speaks in the House of Lords, asking the Government what more they will do to bring perpetrators of sex trafficking to justice.

The Law Commission launched a much-anticipated consultation, outlining proposals to modernise and improve wedding law. The consultation closed on 4 January.

Baroness Cox and others ask the Government whether they will introduce legislation as a matter of urgency to protect women in religious-only marriages, who may find upon divorce they have little-to-no marital or financial rights.

Members of the House of Lords submitted a proposal to the Special Inquiry Committee about ‘the problem of marriages that are not marriages’.

A court reversed a judgment from two years ago, which found that a couple who had an Islamic wedding ceremony could legally divorce. The High Court ruled in 2018 that the couple's Islamic “nikah” ceremony fell within English marriage law. But on 14 February 2020, the Court of Appeal said it was an “invalid” non-legal ceremony.

Baroness Cox asked the Government what progress they have made in implementing the first recommendation of The independent review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales, published in February 2018, in order to protect Muslim women in Islamic marriages which are not civilly registered.

Baroness Cox asked the Government what progress they have made in implementing the recommendations of the independent review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales published in February 2018 (Cm 9560), in order to protect Muslim women, and what assessment they have made of Resolution 2253 (2019) by the Council of Europe that all Islamic marriages should also be registered as civil marriages.

The House of Lords debate what progress has been made in the prevention of grooming gangs in Rotherham and elsewhere; and what assistance the Government have offered to victims and their families.

MPs debate the operation of Sharia councils in the UK.

Baroness Cox asked the Government, following Resolution 2253 (2019) passed on 22 January by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, what plans they have to review the Marriage Act 1949 to make it a legal requirement for Muslim couples to civilly register their marriage before, or at the same time as, their Islamic ceremony.

In its reply, the Government said: “we recognise that the noble Baroness, Lady Cox, has brought a number of proposals for reform to the House… We remain committed to exploring the legal and practical challenges of limited reform relating to the law on marriage and religious weddings.”

The Government published its Integrated Communities Action Plan.

The Plan includes a commitment to “engage with key stakeholders, including faith groups, academics and lawyers, to test views on the policy and legal challenges of limited reform relating to the law on marriage and religious ceremonies. We will then take forward, from April 2019, the detailed work to give best effect to the policy objective.”

It also outlines plans to “support awareness campaigns to educate and inform couples and their children of the benefits of having a civilly registered marriage, including funding for voluntary organisations led by Register Our Marriage to roll out local targeted awareness campaigns in three areas.”

David Gauke MP, the Secretary of State for Justice, receives a letter from MPs and Peers about the plight of British Muslim women in religious-only marriages.

The House of Lords debates what progress the Government have made with the prosecution of grooming gangs in Rotherham and elsewhere; and what assistance they have offered to victims and their families.

A resolution was passed at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe stating that rulings of Sharia councils 'clearly discriminate against women in divorce and inheritance cases'. It calls on the UK to make it a legal requirement for Muslim couples to register their marriages civilly before or at the same time as their religious ceremony.

Baroness Cox speaks in the House of Lords about the case of Sarah (not her real name) who was kidnapped at the age of 15, held as a sex slave for 12 years, forced into three Sharia marriages and had eight forced abortions.

Baroness Cox called on the Government to “respond urgently” to a review on Sharia councils by legislating to protect vulnerable women. She joined with other members of the House of Lords to call for action to back up the verbal assurances already given by the Government.

The Government published its Integrated Communities Strategy Green Paper. The Government committed to “explore the legal and practical challenges of limited reform relating to the law on marriage and religious weddings.

The Home Office published its Independent Review into the application of sharia law in England and Wales.

The Review confirmed that Sharia law is being used in the UK as an alternative to the proper legal process.

A ground-breaking Channel 4 Survey found that 6 in 10 Muslim women who have had traditional Islamic weddings in Britain are not legally married. Of these, over a quarter (28 per cent) are not aware that they do not have the same rights as they would have with a legally-recognised marriage.

Baroness Cox introduced a new Private Member’s Bill into the House of Lords – the Marriage Act 1949 (Amendment) Bill.

The new Bill differs slightly from Baroness Cox’s previous Bill by focusing on marriage law. It is designed to help women in polygamous households or those who have had a religious marriage, only to find upon divorce they have little to no rights in terms of finance or property.

Roger Godsiff MP asked the Government whether it will ‘assess the merits of requiring Imams carrying out the Islamic marriage ceremony to ensure that a civil ceremony has already taken place’.

The Government replied: ‘The Government acknowledges concerns raised about marriage ceremonies that do not give rise to legal rights, and is committed to careful consideration of the issue. That is one of the reasons why the Prime Minister, in her previous role as Home Secretary, launched the independent Sharia review in May last year. These concerns are central to the review, and the Government is considering the issue in light of the report by Dame Louise Casey on opportunity and integration, published in December.’

The 2016-17 session of parliament ended, bringing an end to nearly all parliamentary business. This means that Baroness Cox’s Private Member’s Bill will have to be re-introduced in a future session.

Baroness Cox’s Private Members’ Bill received a Second Reading (first debate) in the House of Lords.

The Bill seeks to address two interrelated issues: the suffering of women oppressed by religiously-sanctioned gender discrimination; and a rapidly developing alternative quasi-legal system which undermines the fundamental principle of ‘one law for all’.

During a House of Lords debate about gender-based violence, Lady Buscombe drew attention to the vulnerability of women in religious-only marriages.

The Casey Review, commissioned in 2015 by the then Prime Minister and Home Secretary, was published.

It cited claims that “some Sharia councils have been supporting the values of extremists, condoning wife-beating, ignoring marital rape and allowing forced marriage… we were told that some women were unaware of their legal rights to leave violent husbands and were being pressurised to return to abusive partners or attend reconciliation sessions with their husbands despite legal injunctions in place to protect them from violence.”

The House of Lords debated the subject of ‘shared values’, during which Baroness Buscombe spoke about the suffering of women oppressed by religiously-sanctioned gender discrimination, and a rapidly developing alternative quasi-legal system that undermines the fundamental principle of one law for all.

The House of Lords debated an amendment to the Policing and Crime Bill. The amendment sought to help women who are married in Islamic ceremonies but are not officially married under English law.

The Home Affairs Select Committee took oral evidence relating to its inquiry into Sharia councils.

The Home Affairs Select Committee published written submissions to their inquiry into Sharia councils.

The Government’s Sharia law review issued a call for evidence.

The Home Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into UK Sharia councils.

The Committee will examine how such forums operate in practice, their work resolving family and divorce disputes and their relationship with the British legal system.

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, launched an independent review into the application of Sharia Law in England and Wales.

Mrs May said: “A number of women have reportedly been victims of what appear to be discriminatory decisions taken by Sharia councils, and that is a significant concern. There is only one rule of law in our country, which provides rights and security for every citizen.”

Baroness Cox introduced her Private Members’ Bill into the House of Lords for the sixth consecutive year.

The 2015-16 session of Parliament ended. As with previous years, Baroness Cox’s Bill will be re-introduced in the next session.

Almost 50 MPs and Peers call on the Government to support Baroness Cox’s Bill.

Baroness Cox’s Private Member’s Bill was scheduled to receive a Second Reading debate in the House of Commons. However, due to the busy Parliamentary timetable, it was not discussed.

Having completed its final hurdle in the House of Lords, Baroness Cox's Private Member's Bill received a First Reading in the Commons.

Baroness Cox’s Private Member’s Bill passed its Third Reading in the House of Lords.

The Home Secretary Theresa May re-confirmed her commitment to launch an independent review of Sharia courts in England and Wales.

Speaking at the Home Affairs Select Committee, she said: "I am very aware that there is concern about how Sharia courts are operating in some circumstances in the UK. That is why we will be doing a review."

Baroness Cox’s Private Member’s Bill passed its Committee Stage in the House of Lords.

Baroness Cox’s Private Members’ Bill received a Second Reading (first debate) in the House of Lords. It gained strong support from parliamentarians of all parties yet the Government refused to support it on the grounds that there is no need for its provisions, as all citizens can freely access their rights.

The Government released its Counter-Extremism Strategy, which said “Shari’a is being misused and applied in a way which is incompatible with the law.”

The strategy includes a commitment to conduct an independent review to “understand the extent to which Shari’a is being misused or applied in a way which is incompatible with the law”.

The Home Office minister Lord Bates said that Sharia law was potentially being applied in a “discriminatory and unacceptable” way in England and Wales.

The Prime Minister David Cameron said: “…we are keeping up the pressure on cultural practices that can run directly counter to [British] values. That’s why the Home Secretary has already announced a review of sharia courts.”

Baroness Cox re-introduced her Private Members’ Bill into the House of Lords to protect vulnerable women from religiously-sanctioned gender discrimination.

In a wide-ranging speech, the Home Secretary Theresa May announced plans for a review of Sharia courts in England and Wales.

Mrs May said: ‘There are some areas where – like in the application of Shari’a law – we know enough to know we have a problem, but we do not yet know the full extent of the problem.  For example, there is evidence of women being “divorced” under Shari’a law and left in penury, wives who are forced to return to abusive relationships because Shari’a councils say a husband has a right to “chastise”, and Shari’a councils giving the testimony of a woman only half the weight of the testimony of a man.  We will therefore commission an independent figure to complete an investigation into the application of Shari’a law in England and Wales.’

The Bow Group published a report, authored by Baroness Cox, entitled: ‘A Parallel World: Confronting the abuse of many Muslim women in Britain today’. The report outlines the provisions of the Arbitration and Mediation Services (Equality) Bill.

The Muslim women’s rights organisation Aurat: Supporting Women published a short report which spoke of the need to ‘protect many British Muslim women from systematic gender discrimination and intimidation’.

During a Question for Short Debate, Baroness Flather asked the Government about the impact of Sharia law on vulnerable women. During the debate, Baroness Cox said: ‘The chasm between the Government’s de jure position and the de facto reality for so many women and girls in this country today is resulting in widespread suffering.’

In her Conservative Party Conference speech, the Home Secretary Theresa May raised concerns about ‘the way Shari’ah law is being applied, the way women are told to live and the intolerant attitudes shown to people of different beliefs and ways of life’.

The Government rejected an amendment to the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, which would have protected women who are duped into believing they are married under the law of the land, only to find upon divorce they have little to no rights in terms of finance or property.

The All Party Parliamentary Group on ‘Honour’-Based Abuse was established as a platform for women to testify to their suffering and to provide evidence of the need for urgent parliamentary attention.

The Conservative MP Kris Hopkins raised the subject of Sharia Law during a House of Commons Westminster Hall debate, stating that ‘One of the cornerstones of our justice system is that we are all equal in the eyes of the law’.

Baroness Cox’s Private Members’ Bill received a Second Reading (first debate) in the House of Lords. It gained strong support from parliamentarians of all parties yet the Government refused to support it on the grounds that there was no need for its provisions, as all citizens can freely access their rights.

Charlotte Proudman, a barrister in human rights law, published evidence in support of Baroness Cox’s Private Members’ Bill. The report included testimonies of Muslim women who have themselves suffered under the current provisions, as well as statements from organisations seeking to help victims of injustice and intimidation.

A Government inquiry into the rise of Sharia councils was abandoned because those operating the ‘courts’ were unwilling to co-operate.

The failure of the investigation was disclosed to MPs by the then Justice Minister Jonathan Djanogly. He explained that the previous Government commissioned “an exploratory study of sharia councils in England with respect to family law”. However, because the limited findings could not be regarded as a representative assessment of the operation of Sharia Councils, the Ministry of Justice decided not to publish them. The Ministry commented at the time that not only were there “practical difficulties” in speaking with respondents, there was also a “reluctance to discuss the private work” of the councils.

Baroness Cox introduced her Private Members’ Bill into the House of Lords for the first time.

The House of Lords debated the case for maintaining the rule of law and ensuring that respect for other cultures does not infringe upon the right of UK citizens to protection under the law.