An integral assessment of relevant perspectives of legal pluralism and the family laws of immigrants

Sharia law and the practising of Muslim family laws have been the subject of heated discussion among the Finns in recent years. Finland receives a certain number of refugees on humanitarian grounds every year. Most of them are from Islamic countries, which leads to a debate on legal pluralism. The debate has also been constructing and perpetuating stereotypes, raising misunderstandings, fear, and panic among the Finns, as well as the immigrants. In this study, we discuss an integral pluralist concept to understand the relationship between the subjective degrees of plurality in practising family laws and the collective social systems including care, culture, and the nature of individuals and group notions. A systemic integral assessment of relevant perspectives can give an insight into different postulates for sustaining many versions of legal pluralism. As a foundational theory, we have illustrated Wilber’s integral approach, which embeds an integral legal infrastructure that can allow various legal systems within a single state. Such an integral approach may influence the adaptation and transformation of different legal orders. The integral approach explains the recognition of mutual ideologies that advance legal pluralism and can also inhibit the growth of legal pluralism by avoiding the monopolisation of laws.