Battle to wear the Niqab in School

[Denny Crane!]

Being fought against by a muslim organisation!

Muslims to pay school's legal fight to uphold niqab ban
By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor
Last Updated: 2:42am GMT 07/02/2007

Comment on this story Read comments


In pictures: Degrees of veiling
A Muslim group has offered to help fund a school's legal battle over its refusal to let a pupil wear the niqab in class.


Veiled woman: The niqab, which covers the whole face apart from the eyes


In an unprecedented move, the Muslim Educational Centre of Oxford (Meco) has written to the head teacher to say it is prepared to contribute to a fighting fund.

Taj Hargey, Meco's chairman, said he was also willing to organise a campaign among Muslims nationally to resist "this largely Saudi-driven campaign to make the niqab a compulsory requirement for Muslim women".

Dr Hargey's offer comes as the school, which cannot be identified because of a court order, faces the prospect of an expensive legal fight without any backing.

Buckinghamshire county council, the local authority for the school, is unwilling to underwrite a challenge which it believes could cost as much as £500,000.

A court on Thursday is due to decide whether the school's decision not to allow the pupil, aged 12, to wear the veil should go to a full judicial review. The school, which already allows girls to wear head scarves called hijabs, drew the line at the niqab, which covers the whole face except the eyes.

It is insisting that the family accepts the uniform policy but the father has been given legal aid to fight a human rights case.

advertisementLast year the law lords ruled that a school in Luton, Beds, was justified in barring Shabina Begum from wearing a jilbab, a long loose gown, to classes but it took a long and expensive legal fight.

The judges made clear that their ruling applied only to the Luton case and it is unclear whether other courts will consider the judgment to have established case law.

If the court allows the case to proceed, the school may be forced to back down, potentially rendering any policy on uniform unenforceable at any school threatened with legal action.

The case is complicated because the girl's sisters were allowed to wear the niqab when a different head was in charge. A new policy has been introduced which the father is challenging. The girl has not been excluded, but has been out of school since early October.

In his letter to the school, Dr Hargey said the father's insistence on his daughter wearing the niqab was a "non-Islamic imposition upon your institution".

He added: "We are strongly committed to offering you our full and unequivocal support in banning face-masks at school. We trust that you will continue to resist any move to implement this kind of minority ethnic obsession, which has no foundation whatsoever in the transcendent sources of Islamic law."

Dr Hargey said that since the school's dress code already allowed the option for Muslim girls to wear the hijab, there was no need for full-face covering.

Paul Goodman, the Conservative MP for Wycombe, has pressed the county council to back the school. But although it says it supports the school's right to decide its own dress code, the council has not promised to fund a legal defence.

Mr Goodman said: "My own view is that we don't want veils in our schools. Veils are a sign of separation."

The school has sought to stay out of the wider cultural issues involved and has taken a stand for "educational and security reasons".

The Department for Education is said to be watching the case closely because of the potential for wider implications if the school has to back down or loses a human rights case.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...05/nveil05.xml

[Sétanta]

Good. I am glad to see many progressives Muslims are starting to fight the primitive, backwards Muslims. It is perfectly within the schools right to ban whatever they want, especially something that represents degredation.

[MasterAdnin]

Good. I am glad to see many progressives Muslims are starting to fight the primitive, backwards Muslims. It is perfectly within the schools right to ban whatever they want, especially something that represents degredation.

This is fine, but I hope this doesn't lead to the women wearing less and less, but also, if the women are fine with wearing the niqab, then it is not a problem.

Adnan

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Outside of school, no, not at all. I got told to take my ring off for jewelry is not allowed. I got told to take off a jacket because it was too bright. A niqab is not necessary.

[Shaun]

This is fine, but I hope this doesn't lead to the women wearing less and less, but also, if the women are fine with wearing the niqab, then it is not a problem.

Adnan

What, you mean Muslim women finally being allowed to wear as 'little' as western women?

[MasterAdnin]

What, you mean Muslim women finally being allowed to wear as 'little' as western women?

I'm saying that women should not become too revealing. Despite what you think, women are not forced to wear the Hijab. Hijab is just a head covering, Burka is more or less forced upon women. The Burka is used in Wahabbi dominated area's. Also, I don't know if you haven't noticed this, but men in Islam aren't supposed to be revealing also. I mean, wear a t-shirt, that's fine for girls and guys, tight jeans, not fine for girls AND boys. I mean, dress codes apply to both genders, but obviously as both have different private areas, they differ for both genders.

Salaam,
Adnan

[Shaun]

I'm saying that women should not become too revealing.

Define 'too revealing'. Also, why not? We in the West live in a secular and liberal society, if women want to be 'revealing' then they can if they want.

Despite what you think, women are not forced to wear the Hijab.

I never said they were.

Hijab is just a head covering, Burka is more or less forced upon women. The Burka is used in Wahabbi dominated area's. Also, I don't know if you haven't noticed this, but men in Islam aren't supposed to be revealing also. I mean, wear a t-shirt, that's fine for girls and guys, tight jeans, not fine for girls AND boys. I mean, dress codes apply to both genders, but obviously as both have different private areas, they differ for both genders.

But why arent they 'fine' in a secular society?

[Erik]

I'm saying that women should not become too revealing. Despite what you think, women are not forced to wear the Hijab. Hijab is just a head covering, Burka is more or less forced upon women. The Burka is used in Wahabbi dominated area's.

From a western point of view there is a huge difference between a Bruka/Niqab and a Hijab.
The reasons why certain westerners oppose the Burka/Niqab is also very different from why certain other westerners oppose the Hijab.

You are unlikely to see a sliding scale where a ban on the Burka/Niqab will lead to a ban on Hijab.
More likely you'll either see a ban on all face covering clothing, or a ban on all religious clothing. (or no ban at all of course).

So the fact that this school wants to ban the Niqab is a actually a good indication that the Hijab is "safe" for the future.
I suspect this is also why that Muslim organization is so supportive of the schools ban on the Niqab.

[Denny Crane!]

I'm saying that women should not become too revealing. Despite what you think, women are not forced to wear the Hijab. Hijab is just a head covering, Burka is more or less forced upon women. The Burka is used in Wahabbi dominated area's. Also, I don't know if you haven't noticed this, but men in Islam aren't supposed to be revealing also. I mean, wear a t-shirt, that's fine for girls and guys, tight jeans, not fine for girls AND boys. I mean, dress codes apply to both genders, but obviously as both have different private areas, they differ for both genders.

Salaam,
Adnan

So tight jeans are fine for men but not for women. You say it is to do with gender but I'm sorry logically it would be more sensible for men not to wear tight jeans if it was gender based since men are more likely to display a package that is if to say there should be any distinction at all which if there is, is totally gender biased.

Which AGAIN is besides the point anyway which is freedom of religion inside of secular organisations OR government institutions.

Peter

[Denny Crane!]

The UK recently has been facing myriad challenges to its secular nature and fortunatly a precedent is being set in favour of secularism though it makes me wonder just how secular Britain really is, not just in terms of muslims but also christians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio2/shows/vine/biography.shtml

Listen again section: Wednesday; one hour into the show is a large discussion on this particular case.

Peter

[jankren]

Burqa is purely Bedouin culture therefore it should remain in Arabia. Islam and Arabism are completely different things.

[Angmar_nite]

I'm against it. You have womens rights? Support them. Slavery being outlawed means its not allowed. Is voluntary slavery allowed then? No.

[Cassy]

Without a doubt. Under no excuse should women be forced to do such a thing.

[Denny Crane!]

Very often it is a matter of choice, through social conditioning and peer pressure. That doesn't make it right, msyoginism is not right whether coerced or forced.

Peter

[Cassy]

Well if a girl makes the choice to do such a thing fair enough, people choose to do stranger things. But a choice with an extensive background of cohersion is no choice at all.

[Denny Crane!]

Well if a girl makes the choice to do such a thing fair enough, people choose to do stranger things. But a choice with an extensive background of cohersion is no choice at all.

So what determines whether something is a true choice and what is done through free will?

Tricky. I feel that the Niqab can not be a logical choice for a person to make. For someone to feel the need to wear such a thing is a need brought about through coercion.

Either way the true question is how secular do we make our institutions, how much would one of the muslim faith schools object to this? I fear they would not and until legislation is enacted they can and by doing so set some precedent for allowing it. That precedent has no legal bearing but that doesn't mean it won't have a large effect on the decision in terms of the court or legislation.

Can we or should we legislate in these matters? Personally I think so.

EDIT: No right to discriminate Eric, its called secularism. Seperation of state and public institutions from religion. Not to mention it is a ridiculous thing to force a 12 year old child to wear. Have you considered the psycological effects of having to wear such a thing at all times (in public) from such a young age or have you immediatly formed a liberal stance for the sake of it without considering the issue at hand.


Peter

[Cassy]

So what determines whether something is a true choice and what is done through free will?

Tricky. I feel that the Niqab can not be a logical choice for a person to make. For someone to feel the need to wear such a thing is a need brought about through coercion.

Either way the true question is how secular do we make our institutions, how much would one of the muslim faith schools object to this? I fear they would not and until legislation is enacted they can and by doing so set some precedent for allowing it. That precedent has no legal bearing but that doesn't mean it won't have a large effect on the decision in terms of the court or legislation.

Can we or should we legislate in these matters? Personally I think so.

Peter

The school is obviously trying to prevent bullying. Erikin makes a good point but I am not sure he has considered this. Personally I feel that it's not infringing on their freedom of religion anymore than the recent occurance of a girl being banned from wearing a cross necklace was. It's not necessary.

[ErikinWest]

The school is obviously trying to prevent bullying. Erikin makes a good point but I am not sure he has considered this. Personally I feel that it's not infringing on their freedom of religion anymore than the recent occurance of a girl being banned from wearing a cross necklace was. It's not necessary.

Define what freedom of religion means, then apply it to this situation, and ask yourself if it is infringing on it. If I may define it IMO: "The right to practice any religious beliefs without exceptions and for the state to not discriminate against any religions". Seems like it violates that, unless you have another definition of freedom of religion.

Erik

[Cassy]

Define what freedom of religion means, then apply it to this situation, and ask yourself if it is infringing on it. If I may define it IMO: "The right to practice any religious beliefs without exceptions and for the state to not discriminate against any religions". Seems like it violates that, unless you have another definition of freedom of religion.

Erik

People also have a freedom from persecution, and any girl wearing this in school shall be attracting it.

[Erik]

If I may define it IMO: "The right to practice any religious beliefs without exceptions and for the state to not discriminate against any religions". Seems like it violates that, unless you have another definition of freedom of religion.

Erik

Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can practice your religion everywhere and at any time.
Nobody forced her to go to that school, she could have gone to a Muslim school where they do allow such clothing if that's so important to her.

And the school isn't discriminating if they ban all face covering clothing, which I'm sure they did.