Many Canadian Muslim couples are hesitant to resort to civil legal processes and attempt to resolve their disputes within the religious community. Islamic law’s exclusion of non-Muslim judges from holding judicial authority in certain family law matters limits the feasibility of aligning religious commands with family court orders. By extrapolating contemporary legal opinions (fatāwā, sing. fatwā) issued by institutions and narrating experiences of Canadian imams, this article documents the views of both researchers and practitioners, finding that neither holds secular court-ordered divorces contested by the husband to suffice as a form of Islamic marriage dissolution. This article concludes that both Canadian imams and fatwā-issuing bodies call for the development of extra-judicial entities that apply Islamic law’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedures in a manner recognized by secular authorities.

Belley proposes a “new legal pluralism” as a new way of thinking and a new perception of law. This conception of law is far from the dissident approach taken in the original understanding of legal pluralism. Instead, it introduces a subversive element by positing the “new legal pluralism” as a substitute for the monist conception of law. This perspective contributes to an understanding of Islamic law and opens up opportunities to explore the sources of Islamic law elaborated in the seventh century CE and redefine the interaction of religion and law at their political interface. The author's hypothesis is that the paradigm of legal pluralism is foundational to Islamic law. Belley's approach constitutes a way of understanding the limitations of the construction of law characterized as “religious.”