[Sharia judge] Dr [Suhaib] Hasan, who is also a spokesman for the Muslim Council of     Britain on issues of sharia law, says there is great     misunderstanding of the issue in the West. "Whenever people associate the word 'sharia' with     Muslims, they think it is flogging and stoning to death and cutting     off the hand," he says with a smile.
He makes the distinction between the aspects of law that sharia     covers: worship, penal law, and personal law. Muslim leaders in     Britain are interested only in integrating personal law, he says.
"Penal law is the duty of the Muslim state - it is not in the     hands of any public institution like us to handle it. Only a Muslim     government that believes in Islam is going to implement it. So there     is no question of asking for penal law to be introduced here in the     UK - that is out of the question."
Despite this, Dr Hasan is open in supporting the severe     punishments meted out in countries where sharia law governs the     country. 
"Even though cutting off the hands and feet, or flogging the     drunkard and fornicator, seem to be very abhorrent, once they are     implemented, they become a deterrent for the whole society.
"This is why in Saudi Arabia, for example, where these     measures are implemented, the crime rate is very, very, low,"     he told The Sunday Telegraph.
In a documentary to be screened on Channel 4 next month, entitled     Divorce: Sharia Style, Dr Hasan goes further, advocating a sharia     system for Britain. "If sharia law is implemented, then you can     turn this country into a haven of peace because once a thief's     hand is cut off nobody is going to steal," he says. 
"Once, just only once, if an adulterer is stoned nobody is     going to commit this crime at all.
"We want to offer it to the British society. If they accept     it, it is for their good and if they don't accept it     they'll need more and more prisons."
...
"The introduction of sharia law in Britain raises complex     questions, as some of its basic tenets are incompatible with the     fundamental principles of our liberal democracy and the Universal     Declaration of Human Rights," says Baroness Cox, a leading     human rights campaigner. 
"There is no equality before the law between men and women     and between Muslims and non-Muslims; and there is no freedom to     choose and change religion."
Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain's     inter-faith committee, admits that to non-Muslims some laws may seem     harsh on women. Those who are married to a man with a number of     wives can be treated badly, for instance. But he insists that sharia     is an equitable system.
"It may mean that a woman married under Islamic law has no     legal rights, but the husband is required to pay for everything in     marriage and in the case of a divorce all the woman's     belongings are hers to keep."
In fact, Sheikh Mogra argues that sharia in Britain would give     rights to women. "A Muslim man can take a second wife under     sharia law and treat her as he wants, knowing that she has no legal     rights in Britain. It means that she is regarded as no more than a     mistress and he can walk out on her when he wants."
Critics warn, however, that in giving even parts of sharia law     official status, Britain would be associating itself with a system     that in many ways was intolerable according to Western values. 
Professor John Marks, author of The West, Islam and Islamism,     points out that apostates from Islam can suffer severe punishment,     even honour killings. 
"There are more violent cases that are being related to     people who choose to convert from Islam," he says.
A survey by Policy Exchange found that 36 per cent of young     British Muslims believed that a Muslim who converted to another     religion should be "punished by death". 
"This clearly goes against the laws of our country. If they     come to live in this country they should live by our laws,"     says Prof Marks.
And here is a new, backhanded argument for making some form of sharia law official in Britain:
Perhaps the strongest argument in favour of some form of     recognition of sharia in Britain is that it would help to regulate a     system that operates beyond the law.The Government has expressed concern about imams who may be using     the Koran to justify fatwas that clash with British law. 
Leaders of four major British Muslim groups published a     government-backed report in 2006 that accepted that many imams were     not qualified to give guidance to alienated young people.
They agreed to set up a watchdog aimed at tackling extremism and     monitoring mosques, but Yunes Teinaz, a former adviser to the London     Central Mosque, warns that one of the greatest problems is the imams     who arrive in Britain unable to speak English, and with no regard     for British law.
"The absence of anyone regulating the mosques and sharia     courts means that they can act as a law unto themselves, issuing     fatwas that breach people's human rights because they have no     knowledge of the law," he says. "They can take     people's money despite having no proper qualifications, but     worse they can harm the communities that they are in."
Zareen Roohi Ahmed, the chief executive of the British Muslim     Forum - one of the four groups on the Mosques and Imams National     Advisory Body - concedes that sharia courts in Britain are still     poorly organised.
"They need development - the government should be supporting     them to deliver their service more effectively," she says.
Who would have thought that Muslims, in their zeal to spread sharia in a secular system, would mirror the arguments of those who want to legalize marijuana?