Off Topic The Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Should the UK remain a part of the EU or leave?

  • Stay in

    Votes: 56 47.9%

  • Get out

    Votes: 61 52.1%
  • Total voters
    117
  • Poll closed .
Advert for Sharia Law court job posted on government site sparks outrage as MPs warn of 'parallel legal system'
28 July 2025, 09:15 | Updated: 28 July 2025, 10:25

There are over 85 Sharia Courts in Britain. Picture: Alamy
By Jacob Paul

A job advert for a role in a sharia court posted on a government website has caused major controversy, with critics saying it promotes a separate Islamic legal system in the UK.

Listen to this article
Outraged politicians have called on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to take down the online posting for the £23,500-a-year administrative role.


The job was posted on July 24 and the role appears to be based in Didsbury, Manchester. The company listed on the ad posting is named as Manchester Community Centre.

The requirements reportedly include a degree in sharia law and experience in sharia courts in Muslim countries.

Independent MP Rupert Lowe expressed 'absolute alarm and disgust' that the DWP's "Find a Job" platform is advertising for a 'Sharia Law Administrator'.


Mr Lowe wrote in a letter to Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall: "The DWP is promoting and facilitating the embedding of a parallel legal system in the United Kingdom.



"Sharia law has no place operating as a recognised legal framework within our country. It is fundamentally incompatible with British law, and our very way of life."

He demanded to know who approved the job posting and called on the department to take it down immediately.

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said "our country and its values are being destroyed" as he blasted the job posting.

Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick echoed Mr Lowe's concerns, posting on X: "As I’ve said before, sharia courts should be banned. The only laws are the laws of England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

"It’s as simple as that."



Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said "our country and its values are being destroyed" as he blasted the job posting. Picture: Alamy
Greater Lincolnshire Mayor and former Tory MP Dame Andrea Marie Jenkyns posted: "The DWP are advertising for a Sharia Law Administrator.

"This along with Britain becoming the Sharia Law Court capital of the Western World has to stop.

"There are over 85 Sharia Courts in Britain. We need to make them obsolete and demand that all who live in this country are only government by the legal system of Britain."

The job posting's description of the role states that it is to "provide all admin and secretarial work for Manchester Sharia Council' including to 'plan, manage, organise and oversee all MSC social and sharia services and activities on a day to day basis".

The Sharia Council of Britain preside over marital cases at their east London headquarters in 2008. Picture: SHAUN CURRY/AFP via Getty Images
Sharia law is an Islamic legal system that derives from the Quran, the Sunnah and Hadith - holy books in Islam.

It acts as a code for living that all Muslims follow, aiming to help them understand how they should lead theirlives according to how God wants.

A DWP spokesman said: "This is a position being advertised on the Find A Job portal by an independent registered charity and is not within DWP.

"Find A Job is a free platform to help jobseekers find vacancies with employers from various sectors."

Latest Donald Trump News
You must log in or register to see images

Greenland PM brands Usha Vance and US delegation's visit a 'provocation' as anti-Trumppro
 
My local high street, in common with many across the country apparently, has become festooned with Union and St George flags and I'm offended by it. I feel like it's a violation. 'What's wrong with a show of patriotism', I hear some ask, but this is not a heartwarming display of patriotism by proud locals. It was done in the middle of the night as part of an organised campaign by right wing and far-right groups intent on fomenting division and disharmony. If I was an immigrant, or even just someone with a black or brown face, I'd feel scared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: finglasqpr
Stroller said:
My local high street, in common with many across the country apparently, has become festooned with Union and St George flags and I'm offended by it. I feel like it's a violation. 'What's wrong with a show of patriotism', I hear some ask, but this is not a heartwarming display of patriotism by proud locals. It was done in the middle of the night as part of an organised campaign by right wing and far-right groups intent on fomenting division and disharmony. If I was an immigrant, or even just someone with a black or brown face, I'd feel scared.
Click to expand...
why are you offended by it
dosent seem to be anything to be scared about

Operation Raise the Colours

Operation Raise the Colours
Operation Raise the Colours is a 2025 campaign in Britain with the stated aim of promoting patriotism[dubious – discuss] through the display of the Flag of England, and the Union Jack. Initially beginning in July 2025 as a show of support for England in the UEFA Women's Euro 2025, the campaign continued beyond the end of the tournament into August. The campaign has involved tying flags to lampposts and painting the St. George's cross onto mini-roundabouts.

Advocates of the campaign claims to be non-partisan and has attracted support from the Conservative Party, Reform UK and the Labour Party. It has also been supported by several figures and organisations associated with the far-right, including Britain First and far-right activist Tommy Robinson.

This prompted accusations that the campaign is linked to the far-right, and has also triggered opposition from anti-racist groups such as Stand Up to Racism, who argue that it is an intentional attempt by the far-right to promote their ideas, inflame tensions and intimidate immigrants, asylum seekers and other ethnic minorities at a time of rising anti-immigration sentiment in the UK.

History
In July 2025, the Saint George's Cross, the flag of England, began appearing in cities and towns across England as a show of support for the England women's national football team in the UEFA Women's Euro 2025.[1][2]

An online campaign called Operation Raise the Colours begun, calling for the public display of the Saint George's Cross and the Union Jack. The stated aim of the campaign was to promote national pride and patriotism.[1][2][3][4] The campaign has involved activists tying up flags on to lamposts and street furnature,[1][2] as well being painted on to roundabouts[1][2][4]

It has been theorised that the campaign may have been formed with the support of the far-right as part of a backlash against the display of Palestinian flags as part of Gaza war protests or the decision of one local council in England, Birmingham City Council, to take down British and English flags after they were displayed on lampposts and other council owned property without permission earlier in the year.[5][6]

A number of activist groups associated with the campaign have emerged across the country.[6] In Birmingham, a group called the Weoley Warriors claimed responsibility for raising flags in Weoley Castle, Northfield, Bartley Green and other nearby areas.[6][7] Another allied group called Flag Force UK claimed responsibility for raising flags across York in Yorkshire, and has also set up a live map of flags in the region.[6][8] In Worcestershire, the Wythall Flaggers launched a campaign to raise flags around Wythall.[9][10]

Several local councils, including Birmingham City Council, City of York Council and Tower Hamlets London Borough Council among others, have taken down the flags, citing safety concerns and a lack of permission to fly these on council property.[6] Others, including Basildon Borough Council, Harlow District Council, Lancashire County Council and several others, have supported the flags and ordered council staff not to take any down, defending it as an expression of patriotism.[11][12]

Reception
Several political figures and groups, including Kemi Badenoch's Conservative Party, Nigel Farage's Reform UK and Keir Starmer's Labour Party, have welcomed and defended the flying of flags amid the campaign.[13][2][3][9] Some have questioned the true motives of the campaign after it transpired that several far-right activists and organisations, including Britain First and senior far-right activist Tommy Robinson, had supported and promoted the campaign.[5][9][4] Nick Ireland, the Liberal Democrat leader of Dorset Council, warned in August 2025 that the campaign had been "hijacked" by the far-right to promote their extremist agenda and said that flying flags could intimidate residents because of this alleged far-right association. The Socialist Worker also said the far-right had "co-opted" it.[3][4][14] Supporters of the campaign have denied links to the far-right or any racial motivation, stating that they only wish to promote patriotism and welcome the involvement of volunteers from any political, racial or ethnic backgrounds.[2][9][15]

Anti-racist organisation Stand Up to Racism expressed its opposition to the campaign and organised counter-protests against campaigners attempting to put up flags.[16][2] The group, citing the campaign's support by Robinson and Britain First, claims that it is an intentional attempt by the far-right to spread their ideas, inflame tensions and intimidate asylum seekers, immigrants, Muslims and other minority groups amid rising anti-immigration sentiment in the United Kingdom.[2][17][18] Anti-racist group Hope not Hate have revealed that some of the campaign's organising had been done by far-right activists.[19][20]

The campaign has been compared to the sectarianism of Northern Ireland, where different, hostile groups paint murals and raise flags to mark their territory.[21][6]

The campaign has prompted debate around the meaning of Britain's national flags, patriotism and the potential links of these flags to the far-right and racist movements.[9][6] Commenting on the campaign in August 2025, black academic Kehinde Andrews said Saint George's Cross was a "clear symbol of racism" because of its use by far-right anti-immigration activists against immigrants from the Windrush generation in the 1950s and 1960s, stating that it represents "that Britishness, Englishness, is white", whereas the flags of Scotland and Wales are not racist because these countries had historically been "oppressed" by England.[9] However, others such as black singer-songwriter Rachel Chinouriri have argued that the flag can be reclaimed despite its racial connotations, with Chinouriri stating that she was proud to be English and to use the flag.[9] Harry Clarke-Ezzidio of the New Statesman asked ethnic minorities in Birmingham what they thought of the campaign and the flags to a mixed response, with some expressing concern and unease while others supported the campaign and the flags.[6]

See also
 
As ever, more than one thing can be true.

Obviously some of these people are a combination of dim and racist. Many will have legitimate concerns and don’t feel they’re being listened to and think this is the way to go about it. Doubt anything positive will come out of it but then the people doing it are unlikely to be thinking that far ahead even if the forces behind it are. Also a lot of people just have an axe to grind with Labour and wouldn’t (didn’t) do this with a Tory government no matter how **** on this or in general.

The council and police are damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Go in hard and people cry ‘two tier justice’. Do not a lot and they come across as weak and encourage more, which hasn’t been a brilliant strategy on frothing Palestine fanatics.
 
Yesterday's decision will just make matters worse, the inference that illegal immigrants have greater rights than the British people will be inflammatory in the current situation.

Interesting that the judge yesterday was a founder member of Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers, the most high profile human rights practice. The outcome would never have been in doubt...
 
Sooperhoop said:
Yesterday's decision will just make matters worse, the inference that illegal immigrants have greater rights than the British people will be inflammatory in the current situation.

Interesting that the judge yesterday was a founder member of Cherie Blair's Matrix Chambers, the most high profile human rights practice. The outcome would never have been in doubt...
Click to expand...

Mob rule can't be allowed to prevail. As soon as the original decision was announced, Farage was encouragng similar demonstrations across the country.

Where was all the outrage when the Tories originially started filling hotels owned by their mates? The answer is to get the asylum applications processed as quickly as possible and return the hotels to their previous use, which the Labour government have committed to doing. Jenrick, when he was responsible, boasted about procuring more hotels and even suggested that slow processing under the Tories was deliberate in order to deter further entrants.
 
Stroller said:
Mob rule can't be allowed to prevail. As soon as the original decision was announced, Farage was encouragng similar demonstrations across the country.

Where was all the outrage when the Tories originially started filling hotels owned by their mates? The answer is to get the asylum applications processed as quickly as possible and return the hotels to their previous use, which the Labour government have committed to doing. Jenrick, when he was responsible, boasted about procuring more hotels and even suggested that slow processing under the Tories was deliberate in order to deter further entrants.
Click to expand...

I see what you're saying regarding 'mob rule' but the problem is there are two mobs involved, one that is clamped down on quickly and another that gets police escorts into the fray. This has been going on under both Labour & Tory governments.
Why do police not use 'behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace' on both sides?

This judgement had it been the original judgement may have been more accepted but reversing the previous judgement fans the flames. I just pity the locals who have this in their midst. Failures from both governments over the past few years are inexcusable...
 
Sooperhoop said:
I see what you're saying regarding 'mob rule' but the problem is there are two mobs involved, one that is clamped down on quickly and another that gets police escorts into the fray. This has been going on under both Labour & Tory governments.
Why do police not use 'behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace' on both sides?

This judgement had it been the original judgement may have been more accepted but reversing the previous judgement fans the flames. I just pity the locals who have this in their midst. Failures from both governments over the past few years are inexcusable...
Click to expand...

If they’d gone for an England-Palestine half and half flag it would’ve put the police and councils in a real pickle about whether to intervene or help out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiwiqpr and BobbyD
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back