Have Birmingham City Council or Manchester City Council ever endorsed Sharia mediation and in what years?

Checked on January 1, 2026
Disclaimer: Factually can make mistakes. Please verify important information or breaking news. Learn more.

This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.

Executive summary

No evidence in the provided reporting shows that Birmingham City Council or Manchester City Council have formally endorsed Sharia mediation; sources document the existence and activity of Sharia councils in Birmingham and Manchester but do not record a municipal endorsement or the years of any such endorsement [1] [2] [3]. National-level scrutiny and parliamentary inquiries have examined Sharia councils’ practices and relationships with the state, but those documents do not equate to city-council endorsement [4] [5].

1. What the reporting documents about Sharia councils in Birmingham and Manchester

Multiple pieces of evidence establish that Birmingham hosts an active Sharia council (notably the Birmingham Central Mosque’s Shariah Council) and that Manchester has an Islamic Shariah presence visited by researchers, with these bodies providing mediation, marriage and divorce services and other religious adjudication to Muslim communities (Birmingham Central Mosque prospectus; historical founding conference 1982; researcher fieldwork in Manchester) [3] [6] [2]. Academic and government submissions record observational research at Birmingham’s council and doctoral fieldwork including the “Islamic Shariah Department in Manchester” [1] [2]. The councils themselves advertise mediation and family dispute services rooted in Islamic principles [7] [3].

2. Direct answer: no recorded municipal endorsement in the supplied sources

Among the supplied documents there is no record that Birmingham City Council or Manchester City Council officially endorsed Sharia mediation, and therefore no years of endorsement can be cited from these sources; the materials discuss Sharia councils’ activities and national inquiry evidence but do not show formal endorsements by the two city councils (absence of evidence in [1]; [2]; [4]; [1]0). Researchers and government reviewers repeatedly note that Sharia councils operate as voluntary religious bodies whose jurisdiction depends on community acceptance rather than statutory municipal approval, which further explains why formal “endorsement” by a city council would be unusual and is not documented here [2].

3. National review and parliamentary scrutiny — engagement but not local endorsement

The Home Affairs Committee launched an inquiry into Sharia councils and national reviews (including the Independent Review into Sharia law in England and Wales) examined how councils operate, their mediation/reconciliation roles, and interactions with state law, but these are central government or parliamentary processes rather than local council endorsements [5] [4]. Those reviews highlight confusion between mediation and reconciliation, report both criticisms and positive experiences at specific councils (including Birmingham), and recommend oversight, guidance or education rather than records of municipal-level endorsement [4] [8] [9].

4. Conflicting portrayals and implicit agendas in the sources

Coverage and submissions vary sharply: investigative journalism and advocacy groups emphasise abuses and coercive outcomes in some Sharia council cases, using examples from Birmingham to argue for reform or legal action [9] [10], while academic fieldwork and council prospectuses present Sharia councils as voluntary community dispute-resolution providers offering mediation and counselling [1] [3] [7]. Some evidence originates from advocacy organisations pushing legislative change (for example One Law for All, whose evidence is highly critical) and therefore carries an explicit reform agenda, whereas mosque-affiliated materials naturally present services positively; the supplied documents should therefore be read with attention to these institutional perspectives [10] [3].

5. Limits of this review and what remains unresolved

The conclusion — that neither Birmingham City Council nor Manchester City Council are recorded in the supplied reporting as having formally endorsed Sharia mediation — is strictly limited to the provided sources; the documents supplied include parliamentary evidence, academic fieldwork, mosque prospectuses and media reporting but do not include exhaustive municipal records or council meeting minutes, so a definitive archival search of city-council decisions would be required to rule out any historical endorsements beyond these sources [1] [2] [5]. The supplied material, however, consistently frames Sharia councils as voluntary religious dispute-resolution bodies rather than municipally endorsed institutions [2] [3].

Want to dive deeper?
What recommendations did the Home Affairs Committee make about Sharia councils in its inquiry report?
Have any UK local authorities funded or partnered with faith-based mediation services, and what were the terms and years of those arrangements?
What legal cases have tested the enforceability of Sharia council decisions in English civil courts?