Sharia in Vienna: How Austria’s Courts Are Eroding the Rule of Law, By Richard Miller (Londonistan)

On August 18, 2025, a Vienna Regional Court upheld a €320,000 arbitration ruling based on Islamic Sharia law, specifically "Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaah." Two men had agreed to settle a contractual dispute under Sharia, but when one was ordered to pay, he appealed, arguing Sharia's ambiguity and incompatibility with Austria's legal values. The court dismissed his claim, stating it didn't need to scrutinise Sharia's rules, only ensure the outcome didn't violate Austria's "fundamental values."

This isn't just a legal footnote. It's a crack in the foundation of Austria's rule of law, opening the door to a parallel justice system.

The rule of law demands one standard, applied equally. Yet, the Vienna court's ruling suggests religious law can govern private contracts, even if its principles clash with secular values. The court's refusal to examine Sharia's application, focusing only on the outcome, sets a chilling precedent. If Islamic law can dictate financial disputes, what's next? Family law? Inheritance? Criminal matters?

Critics, including the Turkish Cultural Community in Austria, warn this creates a "dangerous parallel justice system." They cite a 2003 European Court of Human Rights ruling that deemed Sharia incompatible with democratic principles, arguing it violates EU treaties. Even Austria's Freedom Party (FPÖ) and People's Party (ÖVP) slammed the decision, with MP Michael Schilchegger calling it a boost for "Islamic parallel societies."

This isn't just Austria's problem. As reported today at this blog, in the UK, a man was arrested for saying "We love bacon" near a mosque, branded "racially abusive" under vague public order laws.From Vienna's Sharia ruling to Britain's bacon ban, the pattern is clear: elites are bending legal systems to prioritise certain groups, diluting universal standards. In Canada's Ontario, Sharia-based arbitration is already allowed in civil disputes, showing this trend isn't new.

Austria's Muslim population has grown to 7.9% (2016), with 41% of Vienna's schoolchildren identifying as Muslim. As cultural demographics shift, so does pressure to accommodate religious laws. But when Sharia, or any parallel system, gains a foothold, it fragments justice. What happens when arbitration rulings based on religious texts contradict constitutional rights? The Vienna court's hands-off approach risks legitimising a system that, as critics note, can be "arbitrary" and "incompatible" with democratic values.

This ruling reflects a broader betrayal by elites who choose "diversity" over unity. By allowing Sharia arbitration, they undermine the secular legal framework that ensures fairness for all. ÖVP's Nico Marchetti vowed to block Sharia's application, particularly in civil matters like marriage, but the damage is done. The court's decision sends a signal: your laws, your culture, your rights are negotiable. As X commentator Martin Sellner warned: "Under the guise of 'private agreements,' Sharia is entering the Austrian legal system."

The rule of law isn't a buffet, you don't pick and choose based on faith. Allowing Sharia in Austria's courts risks a fractured society where justice depends on religion, not reason.

https://jihadwatch.org/2025/08/austria-viennese-court-declares-islamic-law-to-be-valid