The separation between religion and the state is widely regarded as a central feature of modernization processes, but sociological research has tended to neglect the extent to which even ‘secular states’ continue to manage religion in such institutions as prisons, hospitals and military establishments. This article extends the understanding of the state's management of religion by focusing on responses to the growth of religious diversity among prisoners and chaplains. In particular, it analyses the integration of Muslim chaplains into the prison systems of Canada and England & Wales. It is based on research – conducted between 2010 and 2012 – that investigated the frameworks governing religion in these two prison systems. This research involved analysis of official policies and regulations as well as transcripts of telephone interviews with a small sample of Muslim chaplains in both jurisdictions. The main focus of the findings reported in this article is on the implications that each prison system's arrangements for chaplaincy have for the work of Muslim chaplains and for questions about religious freedom and equality. These questions are timely in the context of controversies currently surrounding the increasing size of the Muslim prison population in England & Wales and Canada and the need for prisons in both jurisdictions to strike a fair balance between the recognition of religious diversity and the imperatives of security and equality.

No abstract

In 2019, a distinct offence of ‘abusive behaviour towards partner or ex-partner’ (‘domestic abuse’) came into force in Scotland via s. 1 of the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018. This new offence has been celebrated for its meaningful incorporation of the concept of coercive control (Evan Stark has described the 2018 Act as ‘gold standard’ legislation) and may serve as a model for other jurisdictions looking to criminalise coercive and controlling behaviours. The practical effectiveness of the offence in Scotland, however, will hinge on how Scotland’s corroboration rule, and the accompanying Moorov doctrine (‘ Moorov’), are applied in this context. Drawing both on recent doctrinal developments and on a conceptual understanding of the dynamics of coercive control, this article offers the first in-depth analysis of how Moorov is likely to apply in s. 1 cases. It identifies developments that are likely to assist the prosecution, as well as potential barriers to the doctrine’s successful application, and argues that in certain cases judges and jurors will have difficulty seeing the ‘course of conduct’ required by Moorov without proper understanding of the policy underpinning the Act and the gendered nature of domestic abuse. The article considers how this understanding may be brought about, both within the confines of the current law and in terms of possible reform.

No abstract