Photos by Peppy Loulakaki

TheapplicationofShariahintheGreekareaofWesternThrace:
ProtectingthereligiousfreedomoftheMuslimminority
ordismantlingtheGreekConstitution?

ByEiriniKakoulidou
From time to time, EU member countries with a great number of Muslim immigrants discuss the issue
of Islamic family law. Now and then, some Muftis and Muslim organisations express the need for a
designated competent body, which would resolve matters of Islamic Law, such as dissolution of marriage,
inheritance and marriage. The critics are strongly opposed to these proposals, due to secular principles and
the necessity of a common legal framework, which combats any kind of discrimination (racial, religious
etc.).
However, Greece, a EU member state has introduced the Shariah law, in order to settle the legal
cases of Muslims. For almost one century, in the Greek area of Thrace1, the Muslim citizens have exercised

Western Thrace or simply Thrace is located between the Nestos and Evros. Together with the regions of Macedonia and Epirus, it is
often referred to informally as northern Greece. It is also called Greek Thrace to distinguish it from Eastern Thrace, which lies east of
the river Evros and forms the European part of Turkey, and the area to the north, in Bulgaria, known as Northern Thrace.

their right to settle their legal issues with the help of their muftis. The validity of Islamic Law in the Greek
legal system is based on Article 4 of Law 147/1914.2
The prevailing legal opinion is that this provision introduces a personal legal system of local
character that is an exception concerning only the Greek Muslims living in Western Thrace. Greek Muslims
living outside Western Thrace are subjected exclusively to the provisions of the Civil Code. Article 5
paragraph 2 of the later Law 1920/1991 states: The Mufti has jurisdiction among Muslim Greek citizens of
his region on marriages, divorces, alimonies, custodies, guardianships, emancipation of minors, Muslim wills,
and inheritance disputes, if these relationships are ruled by the Shariah.3

In fact, there is a dual judicial system for the Muslim minority in Western Thrace; the application
of Islamic Law and the civil Greek Code. Officially, in the above-mentioned legal issues, the Muslims can
choose either the civil court or the Muftis legal services. Actually, in most of the cases, they choose the
judgement of the Mufti. This special legal system of concurrent jurisdiction, as defined by the EU, is a
matter of controversy among Greek lawyers and human rights organisations.
The vexed question has been whether Shariah family law contains, essentially, discriminatory
provisions which violate human rights, particularly womens rights. On the subject of womens rights, the
application of Shariah law in the area of Western Thrace seems to be in conflict with the provisions of the
Greek Constitution and legislation. Additionally, it violates fundamental human rights which fight against all
forms of discriminatory treatment towards women.

This situation has created a legal and fundamental dilemma; On the one hand, there is the need to
protect the religious freedom of the Muslim minority, in accordance with its own cultural and traditional
values. On the other hand, it is necessary to ensure conformity with the cardinal rules of human rights, both
on a European and on an international level, including the right to religious tolerance. Is it possible for all
these conditions to coexist simultaneously?
The purpose of this assignment is to illustrate the paradox of the application of Islamic law in Greece, an EU
member state, and the contradiction being created.

Neo-millet system in contemporary Greece

The Muslim minority of Thrace has historically emerged from the Ottoman Empires demise and the
creation of a new Turkish nation.4 The Ottoman millet system offered religious minorities the ability to
2

Greek Helsinki Monitor, 2006 : http://www.iwraw-ap.org/resources/pdf/Greece(1).pdf

Ibid

The Muslim minority of Thrace has historically emerged from the Ottoman Empires demise and the creation of a new
Turkish nation. The Treaty of Lausanne (1923) established the obligatory population exchange between Christian Greek
populations which were situated in the borders of the new Turkish nation, with the Islamic Turkish populations which

regulate many of their own affairs and legal issues, under their own ethics and religious customs. In 1926,
the millet system was completely abolished in Turkey, despite the specific provisions from the Lausanne
Treaty, which clearly stated that Greece and Turkey must implement measures in order to ensure that all
issues with regard to the personal status of the minorities would be resolved in line with their religious
customs.5 In order for this to actually happen, the minorities were asked to consent to the revocation of
their special status, which they did. Nevertheless, A. Bedermacher-Gerousis claims that the consent of the
minority was null and void and therefore Turkey violated the international obligation of the Lausanne
Treaty.6

An outstanding paradox is that Turkey, with its primarily Muslim population, has abolished the millet
system in which religious courts were acceptable, but Greece an EU country, with an Orthodox population,
still supports it in Western Thrace. According to Tsitselikis, the Islamic legal regulation of personal status, in
Thrace, converts the old-fashion millet into an enclave of postmodern religious society, creating in fact a
neo-millet system, in which Greek civil law has a secondary role.7

The role of the Mufti and the Qdi

The Ottoman legal system had two main authorities: the Mufti (a scholar who interprets the Shariah)
and the qdi (the judge). The Mufti gave his opinion (fatw) on legal subjects, and then, this fatw could be
presented before court by either of the parties as a legal advice, which could favour either the defendant or
the plaintiff.8
After Greece annexed most of the European territory which previously belonged to the Ottoman
Empire, in 1881, the Greek authorities assigned the functions of the Mufti as well as the ones of the qdi to
the new Mufti. Put differently, the Mufti had, from now on a dual role; he was both a scholar giving the
fatw, and the judge carrying his opinion into effect. In the same year, the Mufti was assigned a third role,

lived on Greek soil. The Greek minority of Constantinople was excluded from this pact, as well as the Islamic minority of
Thrace, which at the time numbered 86,000 people. Out of the latter, 39,000 were of Turkish descent, 30,000 were
Pomaks and 12,000 were Gypsies (Rom). The Treaty of Lausanne declares that Muslim minority members are free to
state their ethnic background (Turkish, Pomak or Rom), speak their native languages, practice their religious tasks and
maintain their customs and traditions.
5

AspasiaTsaoussi and Eleni Zervogianni Tsaoussi, A. and Zervogianni, E. (2008), Multiculturalism and Family Law: The Case of
Greek Muslims, European Challenges in Contemporary Family Law, Katharina Boele-Woelki and Tone Sverdrup, eds., Intersentia:
Mortsel, p.211
6

Ibid p.12, note 9

Tsitselikis, K, The legal status of Islam in Greece, Die Welt des Islams No:44, 3, Brill Academic Publishers: Leiden 2004, p.130

Vikr, K. S. (2005), Between God and the Sultan, C. Hurst & Co.: London.

when Greece signed the Treaty of Constantinople with Turkey. Now, the Mufti was also the religious leader
of Muslim citizens

Therefore, according to Islamic law and tradition, the Mufti has also the duty of collecting the zakt
(obligatory charity), so that the minimum standards of livelihood can be guaranteed for the poorest citizens.
The Mufti organises the zakt in order to redistribute the wealth from the wealthier citizens to the poorest
ones.10

Protecting the religious freedom

The protection of the right to religious freedom for minorities can be found in several international
human rights treaties, characterised as an international standard which should be followed by all states.
Immediately after the World War II, some international institutions included references to religious
freedom, with regards to the principles of non-discrimination, equality, tolerance and respect for other
peoples religion and beliefs. Such institutions contain the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Unfortunately, there is no international official document concerning the protection of religious

freedom exclusively. The UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and Religious
Discrimination is the only such document, which covers the principle of religious tolerance on a global
basis to be followed by all the member states of the international community.

11

According to Article 3 of the Greek Constitution, the Greek state respects the right to freedom of
religious beliefs for every Greek citizen. This article can be analysed into two parts. Firstly, the right to
worship freely, either in private or in public, any religious community or creed whose practice does not
represent a threat to the public order and morals. Secondly, the obligation of the Greek government to
offer legal protection to churches, cemeteries, synagogues, monasteries and other religious institutions of
the minorities. The concept of morality can be interpreted in various ways, depending on historical and
cultural factors. Consequently, it might be different in every society, since there is no international
standard, which can be approved by all religions and cultures around the world.12

Tsitselikis, K. Muslims in Greece, Islam and the European Union, Richard Potz, Wolfgang Wieshaider, eds., Peeters: Leuven, 2004.

10

Zakat is one of the five pilars of Islam.

11

Proclaimed by General Assembly resolution 36/55 of 25 November 1981 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/religion.htm

12

The State, the Law and Human Rights in Modern Greece, Vol. 9, Human Rights Quarterly, 1987.

Human rights
The application of Shariah in family and personal law matters, within the Muslim minority in Thrace,
as many researchers observe, has a tendency to disrespect international human rights norms. The
implementation of the Shariah in Western Thrace is frequently considered as a retrogressive and
anachronistic institution

13

which hinders the social and financial development of the minority.

The main declaration issued by the human rights is that all human beings have equal value and dignity,
regardless of gender, religion or race. Contemporary human rights legislation recognises the existence of
several group rights. Nonetheless, it generally offers adequate protection to the right of individuals and
considers a persons religious and cultural background as part of their distinct identity.

On the contrary, the Islamic Law provides special benefits to men and disfavours women in legal cases of
family disputes, divorces, inheritance and child custody.14 For example, in divorce cases, where a man can
merely divorce his wife without any judicial proceedings being necessary, but Muslim women are not
entitled to a similar right. Another practice in Islamic family law, which can be considered as a
discriminatory rule against women, is drawn up in the law of inheritance. The general rules provide that
daughters are entitled to half the share of sons. Furthermore, the process of divorce, according to Shariah,
as well as the relationship between the married couple, seems to also disadvantage women, especially with
regards to the principle of equality and the free development of the human personality. The form of
divorce, according to which, a husband may unilaterally divorce his wife, without being required to show
cause, and even without the need to recourse to any court or other authority, is apparently discriminatory,
since it is not accessible to the wife. However, a Muslim wife does not have the right to file a divorce,
except by court order on very precise and strict terms. These practices and ethics are in absolute
contradiction with the Greek law and the customs of the country.15

Wedding ceremonies
A typical example: How is the wedding ceremony performed and legally confirmed?
In June 2000, the qdi of the Muslim community in Xanthi in Western Thrace, the Mufti, issued a
marriage licence for virgin women according to the Shariah. (No 157/22.6.2000).16 It includes the following
terms:

13

Anagnostou, D. (1997), Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in the New Europe: The Case of the Muslim Courts in Western
Thrace Paper delivered to the XV Modern Greek Studies, Association International Symposium 1997 on Modern Greece, Kent State
University: Kent, Ohio, p. 5
14

Naskou-Perraki Paroula (2011), The Law of International Organisations. Institutional dimensions (Sakkoulas Publishers, Athens) p.
53
15
16

Ibid
Provided to the writer by member of the Muslim community of W.Thrace.

Donation due to the social union through marriage:

One [1] dress, one [1] golden chain (1 meter length), one [1] pair of earrings, five [5] golden
bracelets, one [1] golden ring, one [1] watch, a mattress, a quilt and forty [40] kilos of copper.
Donation due to dissolution of marriage:
One hundred and one (101) golden pounds.
Since we have settled the above cultural wedding differences, we do not see any religious or
other impediment to the marriage between the virgin woman [], who is a Greek citizen and
lives in [], and [] who is a Greek citizen and lives in [].
This contract was executed by me, the Mufti of Xanthi.
The wifes representatives
The husbands representatives

Such licences, with similar terms, contrary to the Greek law, the Constitution and the European legislation,
are issued for every similar legal act between Muslim citizens of Thrace. If the Greek courts authorise the
enforcement of these licences, they are valid. Most of the times they are authorised. When the Greek courts
authorise their enforcement, this is supposedly happening because of the treaties that have been signed by
Greece, from time to time, which are considered as binding. Is that the case?
It is interesting that the two greatest institutions of the Greek justice disagree on whether this Treaty of
Athens (1914) that legally covers the Shariah regime in Thrace, is valid or not. In two of its (similar)
decisions, the Greek Council of State has decided that this Treaty of Athens is no longer valid, because it is
utterly covered by the terms of the Treaty Lausanne (1923) which followed the population exchange
between Greece and Turkey. The Supreme Court of Cassation has consistently held that The Treaty of
Athens is the legal foundation of the minority protection in Greece.17

Is Shariah in W. Thrace voluntary or obligatory?

Officially, in the legal issues mentioned above, the Muslims can choose either the civil court or the
Muftis legal services. Nonetheless, according to Tsitselikis, the Muftis jurisdiction has actually become
mandatory, since Muslim women are entrapped by social stereotypes: in case of an application for judicial
review to the Greek civil courts, this legal action would be criticised, due to lack of loyalty towards the
minority.18
17

In his book Sacred law of Islam and Muslim Greek citizens -between communalism and liberalism, the Greek lawyer Giannis
Ktistakis refers to this argument and agrees with the Councils view, emphasising that the existing distance from the Greek civil
Code, as far as the Muslim minority of Thrace is concerned, is conflict with essential components of the contemporary human rights
protection.
18

Tsitselikis, K The legal status of Islam in Greece, Die Welt des Islams No:44, 3, Brill Academic Publishers: Leiden 2004 p.p 112113

Almost all researchers in the field of Islamic law in Western Thrace share the above-stated
presumption. This could also be interpreted the opposite way: If the principles of a minority are
sociologically assumed to be cherished by women, they would not automatically have an utterly
individualistic need to resolve their issue at any expense, i.e. at the civil court (or the Christian court, as
considered by many Muslims). Certainly, there are exceptions, but the assumption that, if Muslim women
were not expected by society to choose the Mufti, they would probably choose the civil courts, is rather
generalising. The fact that Muslim women are highly dedicated to Islamic principles is very significant and it
should be taken into account. Nevertheless, Dia Anagnostou states that the Muftis decisions are not a sign
of a strict application of Shariah to family issues but they demonstrate respect towards civil law principles,
which gradually have blended with what is considered socially acceptable and legitimate by the Muslim
society.19
Moreover, there is a new trend among the Muslims of Thrace: In inheritance matters and in division
of matrimonial property, in case of a divorce, the two parties will first seek advice from the Mufti. If the
two parties are not satisfied by the Muftis legal opinion, then they can bring the matter before the Civil
court. Anagnostou states that, nowadays, most Muslims usually prefer to seise to Civil courts in order to
resolve their inheritance matters, which have gradually fallen under the jurisdiction of civil courts.20

The control mechanism of the Civil Court

The Civil Court controls the limits of jurisdiction of the Muftis legal decision, without examining the
merits of the case. If a Muslim lodged an appeal against the Muftis decision to the Civil Court, the judge
would control only the application of this particular decision. What is more, the Civil Court and the Court of
Appeal control the constitutionality of the Muftis decision. Nevertheless, if the civil court wants to control
the constitutionality of the Muftis decision, the judge is not familiar with the content of the Islamic law
rules and, thus, is unable to evaluate this decision.21 This could actually be a problem, because the
condition of the gender equality provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights does not seem to
be compatible with certain provisions of Islamic family and inheritance law.

19

Anagnostou, D. (1997), Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in the New Europe: The Case of the Muslim Courts in Western
Thrace Paper delivered to the XV Modern Greek Studies, Association International Symposium 1997 on Modern Greece, Kent State
University: Kent, Ohio, p.24
20

Anagnostou, D. Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in the New Europe: The Case of the Muslim Courts in Western Thrace
Paper delivered to the XV Modern Greek Studies, Association International Symposium 1997 on Modern Greece, Kent State
University: Kent, Ohio, 1997, p.24

21

Tsitselikis, K. Muslims in Greece, Islam and the European Union, Richard Potz, Wolfgang Wieshaider, eds., Peeters: Leuven 2004
p. 104

Eleni Zervogianni mentions that, according to the statistics, only 11 out of 2,679 cases have been
found unconstitutional, since 1991. She states that, apparently, Greek judges do not essentially examine the
essence of a decision when they have to decide on its unconstitutionality.22
Even though the jurisdiction of the Mufti is officially controlled by the Civil Court and the Court of Appeal,
this control mechanism, in fact, interferes with the decisions of the Mufti only on exceptional occasions.

Unwritten law
According to the Hanafi school of Law (which is the most popular school for Muslims in Western
Thrace), one apparent reason for the judges of the Civil Court not being easily familiar with Islamic law is
the fact that the applied law is not in written form. It is neither standardised nor codified. During Ottoman
times, the Mufti gave his legal opinion (fatw) on matters and the qdi was able to use both the diverse
rules of the Shariah and the qnun, which was a legal Code drawn up by the Sultan. However, the new
Mufti of Western Thrace issues the fatw without having any supplementary authoritative text, issued by a
political authority, which must be recognised by Islamic religion.
Nevertheless, there are obviously different approaches regarding the status of the Mufti. The Muslims of
Western Thrace frequently, contrary to the term courts, claim that the Mufti does not issue his opinion on
legal cases based on the conventional and civil sense of the term; his role is primarily consultative and
compromising.23

Concurrent jurisdiction - Should this model be revised?

In its 2009 Human Rights Report: Greece, the U.S. Department of States Bureau of Democracy,
Human Rights, and Labour states that Shariah is criticised by many NGO and media reports as
discriminatory against women, especially in child-custody, divorce, or inheritance cases.24 In contemporary
Greece, there are critics who want the present political model to be abolished or reformed. The expertise
of the researchers is crucial for the NGOs and media.

22

AspasiaTsaoussi and Eleni Zervogianni Tsaoussi, A. and Zervogianni, E. Multiculturalism and Family Law: The Case
of Greek Muslims, European Challenges in Contemporary Family Law, Katharina Boele-Woelki and Tone Sverdrup, eds.,
Intersentia: Mortsel, 2008, p.p 119-120
23

Anagnostou, D. Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in the New Europe: The Case of the Muslim Courts in Western Thrace
Paper delivered to the XV Modern Greek Studies, Association International Symposium 1997 on Modern Greece, Kent State
University: Kent, Ohio, p.25
24

http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/eur/136034.htm

The studies have various approaches and conclusions.

The most penetrating critique on the application of Islamic law in the Greek legal system is provided by
Yannis Ktistakis. In his book The Holy Law of Islam and the Greek Muslim Citizens (Athens/Thessalonica:
Sakkoulas Publishers, 2006), he states that Greece is the only European country which still implements the
Shariah, and that Shariah is interpreted and applied by Holy Courts in Western Thrace in the most
anachronistic way. The study illustrates the fact that, contrary to the Greek governments statements, no
provision of the Treaty of Lausanne makes the implementation of the Shariah or the functioning of Holy
Courts mandatory for the Muslim minority members. What is more, he states that Greek courts cannot
evaluate the merits of decisions, which are based on an unwritten law that is unfamiliar to the Greek
judges. In addition, the Muftis decisions are written in a foreign language (Ottoman Turkish). Therefore,
the Greek judges cannot read them, since their translations are frequently inaccurate.25

After giving examples of several problems caused by the Muftis decisions, such as parental
consent for child marriages, womens unequal rights to obtain a divorce, indifference towards childrens
best interest in custody cases, Ktistakis reaches the conclusion that, due to child marriages of children, the
number of Muslim divorces is five times higher than Christian divorces.26 It is not quite clear if Ktistakis has
any suggestion as an alternative solution, except for the abolition of this concurrent jurisdiction.

Aspasia Tsaoussi and Eleni Zervogianni offer another thorough critique of the concurrent jurisdiction.
In their study Multiculturalism and Family Law: The Case of Greek Muslims, based on the fact that the
concurrent jurisdiction disfavours Muslim women, they suggest that there is a better alternative. They
advise the Greek citizens, regardless of their religion, to move towards mediation, in order to settle their
family matters. According to them, the basic principles of mediation fulfil the overwhelming moral and
religious needs of both cultures in Western Thrace. Therefore, they provide and contain the common values
of the two competing, yet coexisting systems.27

Their critique begins with the almost similar principles shared by the minority and the majority. They
also argue that it is possible to address the sensitivity of the two communities in a single jurisdiction system
through the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedure. This idea seems to combine the mediation of
the Shariah with the secular principle, which requires one jurisdiction for all citizens. Tsaoussi and

25

Greek Helsinki Monitor 2006 p.37

26

Ibid p. 39

27

AspasiaTsaoussi and Eleni Zervogianni Tsaoussi, A. and Zervogianni, E. (2008), Multiculturalism and Family Law: The Case of
Greek Muslims, European Challenges in Contemporary Family Law, Katharina Boele-Woelki and Tone Sverdrup, eds., Intersentia:
Mortsel. p.223

Zervogianni claim that the Qur'ans solution to divorce offers the most typical example. As they mention, in
Islam, divorce is acceptable only when there are major irreconcilable differences. Divorce has to be the last
solution, since, according to the Prophet, divorce is the most despicable of all legal action, in the sight of
God. Hence, the Quran encourages the parties to try harder to reconcile, in the following steps: (1) The
parties must make an effort to resolve their disputes and confront their problems together; (2) If they fail,
two conciliators, one from the husbands side and the other from the wifes side, should be sent, in order
for them to settle their differences. (3) If the conciliators efforts also fail, divorce may be granted.

According to Konstantinos Tsitselikis, the application of Islamic law within the framework of a
European legal order causes some incompatibilities. In certain cases, individual rights and principles of
equality are in conflict with religious freedom.28
It is evident that Tsitselikis, in many of his conclusions, considers balancing various interests as a
high priority. He claims that the current political model is disadvantageous not only to citizens who bring
their cases before the Mufti, but also to the authority and significance of this Muslim institution. In
addition, he suggests a re-evaluation and reform of the Mufti institution, with equal concern for the Muslim
religious traditions and their freedoms, as well as for the fundamental principles and individual rights of the
European legal order. His last suggestion is about the Muftis qualifications as a legal leader. Tsitselikis is
suggesting that, apart from the religious education, the Mufti candidate should be equally qualified with the
rest of the judges, so as to avoid a debasement of his role. 29 In his conclusive statements, Tsitselikis says
that the social balance between legally imposed norms should be in consideration, and that these norms are
unknown to the minority society.30

Federation of Western Thrace Turks in Europe (ABTTF), which has its headquarters in Germany, has
submitted a similar report to relevant authorities, right after the release (11 March 2010) of the 2009
Human Rights Report: Greece, written by the U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights, and Labor. The report includes many of the issues on the topic of the Muslims in Western Thrace that
have been puzzled by the U.S. report. In the section regarding women, the report states that If the
government restrained the powers of the Mufti (who has undertaken religious duties) and if it abolished the
recognition of Shariah, it would be a violation of its obligations, which arise from international treaties in
which Greece has participated. Nonetheless, this does not automatically mean that the Turkish Minority of
Western Thrace disrespects any concern about the application of Shariah in the area of Thrace, which is

28

Tsitselikis, K. The legal status of Islam in Greece, Die Welt des Islams No:44, 3, Brill Academic Publishers: Leiden. 2004, p.p
121-122
29

Ibid p.122

30

Ibid p.131

10

meticulously stated in the report. ABTTF reminds us that Islamic inheritance law has a restricted
application in Western Thrace, and it is not a part of the Turkish Minoritys tradition.31

Conclusions
The position of a Mufti in the Greek legal order is characterised by a fundamental contradiction
between two factors, which are equally based on respect for human rights:

The problem which is caused by the major conflict between Islamic law (Shariah) and Greek Law,
the current sense of justice in Greece and the international conventions, signed by Greece, for the
protection of human rights.

The right of the Muslim minority in the Greek region of Thrace to preserve their rights, which are
established, in their religious law. These rights are important to this minority, in order to maintain
its coherence as a community.

According to its current legal situation, a Mufti has a dual role:

On the one hand, he is the highest official of religious law: He has a supervising role over mosques,
prayer leaders per mosque, cemeteries and waqfs. In addition, he offers his advice and guidance to
Muslims, he controls all charity work and he performs wedding ceremonies.

On the other hand, he is a qdi (a religious judge), having control over the differences between
Greek Muslims who live on his district. These differences are related to only a few issues of Family
law and Inheritance law, which are crucial issues, as far as human rights are concerned. The legal
opinions and edicts, which are issued by the Mufti, are estimated by the Court of Common Pleas, and
thus, become enforceable.

Problems
If we examine the current law, both the Substantive and the Procedural law, we will discover the
following three categories of problems, which inhibit the Muftis work and justice:

In many cases, there is a poor control of constitutionality and contradiction between the Muftis
legal opinions and European or public policy. The application of Shariah causes serious problems, if
it is controlled according to the basic principles of the law, such as equality, or childrens and
womens best interest (See relevant binding International law on human rights, International

31

Federation of Western Thrace Turks in Europe (2010), Parallel Report by ABTTF on the 2009 Human Rights Report:
Greece: https://www.abttf.org/images/Raporlar/US-2010-Human-Rights-Report-on-Greece_Parallel-Report-byABTTF.pdf

11

Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Convention on the Rights of the Child, Convention on the
Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women, etc.)

The Greek civil courts interpret in a strict way the Muslim term Greek Muslim citizens in the district
of a mufti, according to legislation 1920/1991. As a result, the Greek courts do not authorise the
enforcement of the Muftis legal decisions in regard to a wedding between a Greek and a foreign
citizen or a wedding between inhabitants outside the Muftis district. Therefore, the dissolution of a
marriage is impossible.

Since 2008, there is an equally strict interpretation on the Muftis jurisdiction over child-custody
cases. As a result, the Muftis legal opinions on such cases, in case of a divorce, are not been
complied with.

Legislative gaps

The optional jurisdiction of the Mufti either is not provided for or is not applicable. Very often,
civil courts bring cases before the Mufti, as an exclusively competent body.

In cases where the one party approaches the civil courts and the other party approaches the Mufti,
there is no provision for such cases.

In cases ruled by the Mufti, there is no provision for a second-degree trial or an annulment of his
rulings.

Neither the legal representation, nor the principle of equality of the parties, nor the courts
statement of the reasons for its decisions is compulsory.

If we compare the application of Islamic law in three Muslim districts of Greece, there is a difference
in the quality of justice. The application of Islamic law in Komotini is, to an evident degree, the
best.

***

References

Tsitselikis, K. 2004, The legal status of Islam in Greece, Die Welt des Islams No:44, 3, Brill
Academic Publishers: Leiden.

Tsitselikis, K. 2004, Muslims in Greece, Islam and the European Union, Richard Potz, Wolfgang
Wieshaider, eds., Peeters: Leuven

12

Yannis Ktistakis, 2006, The Holy Law of Islam and the Greek Muslim Citizens
(Athens/Thessalonica: Sakkoulas Publishers.

Boussiakou, I. 2008, Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in Greece: the case of the Muslim
minority in western Thrace, the Hellenic Observatory, London School of Economics, Greece
Paper No 21: London.

Anagnostou, D. 1997, Religious Freedom and Minority Rights in the New Europe: The Case of
the Muslim Courts in Western Thrace Paper delivered to the XV Modern Greek Studies,
Association International Symposium 1997 on Modern Greece, Kent State University: Kent,
Ohio.

Zafiris Mekos, 1991, The Muftis jurisdiction and the Greek Law (Sakkoulas Publishers, Athens/
Kommotini, 1991.

Greek Helsinki Monitor 2006, Parallel Report on Greeces Compliance with the UN Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, http://www.iwrawap.org/resources/pdf/Greece(1).pdf

Athina Kotzabassi, Family Legal Relationships among Greek Muslims, (Athens/Thessalonica,

2001, www.kethi.gr), Systematic legal approach to this matter, developed by the Research
Centre on Equality Issues (Kethi).

Konstantinos Tsitselikis, The Mufti's position in the Greek legal order, In: D. Christopoulos
(eds), Legal issues of religious alterity in Greece, Athens: Kritiki/KEMO

13

MAP OF GREECE WITH WESTERN THRACE IN GREEN

14