High court rules Cairo University can restrict use of full veils

Salwa Samir February 10, 2020

REUTERS/Amr Abdallah Dalsh
A woman wearing a niqab stands near a hieroglyphic mural in el-Dokki 

district of greater Giza, south of Cairo, Dec. 22, 2012.

After five years of public debate, Egypt's top court has settled the issue: Cairo University, one of Egypt's oldest higher education institutions, can ban its professors from wearing full-face veils, or niqabs, inside lecture halls. The ban does not apply to the rest of the campus.

The High Administrative Court ruled Jan. 27 that, while a person's choice of attire is among the personal freedoms guaranteed by the constitution, this freedom is not limitless and should not contradict public morals. The court noted that the Regulation of Universities Law doesn’t require staff members to don uniforms, but does demand that they abide by university traditions. With its ruling, the court rejected the appeal by some 80 of the schools' teachers who challenged the ban.

The next day, Cairo University media adviser Mahmoud Alam Eddin told CBC News that the niqab ban in lecture halls would be implemented by Feb. 8, the start of the second semester. Professors who don't comply won't be allowed to teach, he added.

Ain Shams University quickly followed suit, with President Mahmoud al-Metiny announcing Feb. 4 that his school would implement a ban immediately.

The controversy arose five years ago when Gaber Nassar, former president of Cairo University, called for the prohibition. Nassar said back then that the veil hinders clear communication with students, especially during academic lectures.

Egyptian parliament members have attempted numerous times to prohibit niqabs.

In 2018, legislator Ghada Ajami proposed a draft law that called for banning all women from wearing the niqab in public places such as restaurants, universities and parks and called for violators to be fined 1,000 Egyptian pounds ($63) or more.

Ajami described the niqab as a source of sedition in society, as it reflects the extremist ideology of ultraconservative movements. She said the ban would help combat terrorism. But after backlash over the proposal, Ajami gave up the effort, acknowledging a ban might cause divisions in the country.

That same year, Mohamed Abu Hamed, another lawmaker, called on the prime minister to ban the full-face veil in state and educational institutions, similar to action taken in Algeria. But many parliamentarians rejected his call, saying it would restrict personal freedom.

Cairo University is not the first institution to succeed in barring its staff from wearing the niqab. Al-Azhar, Egypt's top religious authority, made the call in 2009.

The former grand imam of Al-Azhar, Sheikh Mohammed Sayyid Tantawi, issued a decision to ban female staff and students from donning the niqab at the university, even in dormitories. Tantawi said the full-face veil is a sign of radicalism and has nothing to do with Islam.

There are supporters and opponents of the ban at Cairo University and in the general public. The Revolutionary Socialists, a movement established in 2011 after the January 25 Revolution, rejected the court's decision.

It said in a statement on Facebook, "We must defend women's right to choose their clothing." The university should pay attention to "factors that actually affect the educational process and the ability of a faculty member to deliver knowledge, not her appearance."

Lawmaker Dalia Youssef hailed the recent ruling and called for extending the ban to include students as well, to help shape Egyptian society’s way of thinking.

“I asked the minister of higher education [and the Ministry of Health] to issue a decision that applies to all universities," she said by phone on an al-Haya TV talk show Jan. 28. "The matter doesn’t require a draft law, as there is already a court ruling.”

Shaimaa Mousa, an assistant lecturer in Greek and Latin studies at Cairo University's School of Arts, told Al-Monitor she totally agrees with the ban.

“Actually, I am against the niqab, whether in or outside the university. How can I communicate with a person who is fully veiled except for her eyes?” Mousa said. “The face and body language are among the most important tools of communication."

However, Mousa noted that niqab wearers may find ways to circumvent the ban, as one ultraconservative Muslim recently suggested. Sameh Abdel Hamid, former leader of the Salafist Nour party, said Jan. 28 on Facebook that niqab-wearing staff at Cairo University should instead wear medical masks in lecture halls. He claimed the masks have many benefits, like avoiding the coronavirus. “The law will not prevent the use of masks,” Abdel Hamid said.

Salwa Samir, an Egyptian journalist, has been writing about human rights, social problems, immigration and children's and women's issues since 2005.




Read more: https://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2020/02/egypt-cairo-university-ban-niqab-religion-freedom.html#ixzz6EqPoGmlE

The dispute over the Islamic veil in Russia

by Vladimir Rozanskij

Moscow is debating the possible ban on wearing the Niqab proposed by deputies and opinion makers who insist on the need to curb extremist tendencies, recalling how in several Central Asian countries this measure has existed for some time. Mufti are divided among themselves, while some members of United Russia are also against it, fearing repercussions in relations with the Islamic world.

Moscow (AsiaNews) - Discussions have been going on for weeks in Russia over the possible ban on wearing the Niqab, the Islamic veil that covers the entire face leaving only a slit for the eyes, often associated with the fundamentalist current of Wahabism. It was the president of the Human Rights Council, Valerij Fadeev, who once again proposed the ban, supported by various deputies and opinion leaders who insist on the need to curb extremist tendencies among Muslims throughout the country, even though the Ministry of the Interior has not provided any statistics to support these fears.

The issue of the Niqab, moreover, also divides the Muslim community in Russia, and religious leaders simply rule out restrictions on the Hijab, the bare-face veil. The Kprf communists have announced that the draft law on the ban, which envisages at least a 15 thousand rouble (150 euro) fine for any form of face covering, has already been sent to the government for official consideration. Fadeev said he was 'disturbed that so far the Niqab has not been banned in Russia', whereas in several Central Asian countries such a restriction has been in place for some time. The politicians intend to discuss the issue directly with the leaders of traditional Islam and regional authorities.

The Grand Mufti of Moscow, Ildar Aljautdinov, warns that a ban that is too direct could lead to tensions in society: "These attempts may appear to be a violation of the secular norms of law and the constitution, which guarantee all citizens of Russia the freedom to profess their religion, and to observe its canons". United Russia deputy in the Moscow Duma Ildar Gilmutdinov, head of the Federal National and Cultural Autonomy of the Tatars, spoke in favour of the Niqab, warning in turn that a ban could make Russia's relations with the entire Islamic world more difficult.

A member of the Human Rights Council, Kirill Kabanov, a long-standing supporter of the strict line on migrant issues, reacted to these statements by claiming that 'for traditional Russian Islam, this type of clothing is not at all natural', and that its recent spread is nothing more than 'a provocation by radicals, who have a hostile attitude towards us and our country, and are alien to our traditions and our world'. He, too, recalled that in Central Asia the Niqab and even the Paranja, the veil that completely covers women's bodies, is not allowed, and Kprf deputy Mikhail Matveev believes that 'first of all we need an official pronouncement from religious leaders on what clothes are appropriate for Muslims in Russia'.

Some recalled a speech by President Vladimir Putin in 2012, in which he argued that "the Hijab is not part of our culture, part of our traditional Islam, why should we take on traditions that are foreign to us?" Aljautdinov replied that 'if the decision of the ban really helps to protect the lives of our citizens, curbing the growth of Islamic extremism, then we will all support it, but this argument must be supported by real data'. It was the deputy interior minister, Andrej Khrapov, who responded to these appeals by noting that 'there are no clear signs of a radicalising trend in Islam in Russia'.

Other religious leaders, such as Kamil Samigullin of the Islamic administration of Tatarstan, also affirm that 'the ban is an attack on Muslims', while the Mufti of Volgograd, Kifakh Mokhamad, supports the proposal, recalling the recent attack on Krokus City Hall, pointing out that 'the Niqab is not a religious attribute, but only a habit of some Muslim societies, which has no reference to Sharia law'. Some propose to leave the decision 'in the hands of the governors, depending on regional traditions', and from many quarters it is reiterated that the key issue is not the (unproven) danger of radicalism, but rather to 'avoid the growth of Islamophobia' in Russia, which often becomes a form of repression of migrants.

Swiss ‘Burqa Ban’: Why Face Covering Is Prohibited In Switzerland Beginning January 1

The ban came about after a referendum held in 2021, in which Swiss citizens narrowly voted in favor of prohibiting face coverings in public, including the burqa and niqab worn by some Muslim women. The final tally was 51.2 percent in favor versus 48.8 percent opposed.

Outlook Web Desk
Updated on: 1 January 2025

Representative image

In Switzerland, the law prohibiting facial coverings has officially come into effect beginning January 1, 2025. The law known as the “burqa ban,” restricts face covering in public – including wearing the burqa or niqab which is commonly worn by Muslim women. Those who violate this law will be charged with fines of up to 1,000 Swiss francs (Rs 94,651.06).

What is exactly banned under this new law?

The new law specifically bans the covering of the nose, mouth, and eyes in both public spaces and private buildings accessible to the public. However, there are some exceptions – the ban does not apply to facial coverings worn for health reasons, such as medical masks or during cold weather; and coverings are permitted in places of worship, for artistic performances, or in advertising.

The ban also makes room for personal protection in cases where face covering is necessary for freedom of expression or assembly, as long as public order is maintained, and the responsible authorities approve such instances.

The facial coverings, notably, are still allowed on planes and in diplomatic or consular premises, as well as in certain sacred sites.

ALSO READ| The Shadow of Burqas

Why did Switzerland ban face coverings?

The ban came about after a referendum held in 2021, in which Swiss citizens narrowly voted in favor of prohibiting face coverings in public, including the burqa and niqab worn by some Muslim women. The final tally was 51.2 percent in favor versus 48.8 percent opposed.

The proposal was proposed by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which campaigned with slogans such as “Stop extremism.” Although the proposal did not explicitly target Islam, it has been widely perceived as a response to Islamic face coverings.

The Swiss government itself opposed the ban, arguing that it was not the role of the state to dictate what individuals, especially women, wear.

The ban's primary objective is to address what proponents argue is a symbol of extremism and a potential security risk.

Controversy over the ban proposal

Human rights groups, including Amnesty International, have sharply criticized the measure. Amnesty called the ban “a dangerous policy that violates women’s rights, including their right to freedom of expression and religion.” Critics argue that the ban disproportionately affects Muslim women, many of whom choose to wear the niqab or burqa as an expression of faith or personal conviction.

ALSO READ| If You Want To Ban Burqa Then 'Ghunghat' Should Go Too: Javed Akhtar

Research from the University of Lucerne revealed that the actual number of women in Switzerland who wear the burqa is negligible, with around 30 women reported to wear the niqab. Muslims make up about 5 percent of Switzerland’s population of 8.6 million, with the majority of Muslim residents hailing from countries like Turkey, Bosnia, and Kosovo.

Despite the relatively low number of people directly affected, the law's passage has ignited a broader debate about religious freedom, the rights of women, and cultural integration in the country.

KENNEY LIES

Alberta premier denies supporting niqab ban despite past public statements

© Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press Alberta Premier Jason Kenney is denying he ever supported a ban on niqab or face veils worn by some Muslim women.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney is denying he supported a ban on niqabs even though he issued a directive in 2011 banning women from wearing them during citizenship ceremonies when he was the federal minister of citizenship and immigration.

Kenney made the remarks during a news conference following the virtual Western Premiers Conference on Tuesday.

"I've never supported a proposed ban," Kenney said.

"To the contrary, I've always said that Canada is a country that protects and respects religious freedom and pluralism, and the government has no business regulating what people wear unlike in certain European and Middle Eastern countries that do have bans on face coverings," he added.

"That has never been proposed. I've always opposed that."

Kenney is facing new questions about his record in light of recent comments by Tim Uppal, the Conservative MP for Edmonton-Mill Woods.

Uppal, who became the spokesperson for the niqab ban as the minister of state of multiculturalism in the Harper cabinet, apologized in a Facebook post Sunday for not pushing back harder against the policies of his former government which he said "alienated Muslim Canadians and contributed to the growing problem of Islamaphobia in Canada."

Uppal said he decided to publicly account for his past actions after four members of a Muslim family were struck and killed by a man driving a truck in London, Ont.

The accused is now facing terrorism charges in addition to four charges of first-degree murder and one charge of attempted murder. One family member, a nine-year-old boy, survived the attack.

Uppal's caucus colleague, Calgary-Nose Hill MP Michelle Rempel Garner, also apologized for her inaction.

Despite his denial on Tuesday, Kenney continued to take responsibility for and defend the policy as recently as 2015, when the ban was struck down in court.

Kenney was also a member of cabinet when the Conservative government led by former prime minister Stephen Harper proposed a hotline during an election campaign to report so-called "barbaric cultural practices."

© CBC Edmonton-Mill Woods MP Tim Uppal, seen here in 2015 when he was minister of state for multiculturalism, became the spokesperson for legislation to ban face-coverings at citizenship ceremonies.

Uppal, who appeared on CBC Radio's Edmonton AM Tuesday, deflected questions about whether he felt Kenney should apologize as he was accounting for his own actions as the minister of state for multiculturalism.

"[Kenney] has a very good relationship with a lot of people in the Muslim community," Uppal said. "This is something that I have seen myself first-hand."

Kenney left federal politics in 2016 to run for the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta, the first step in his successful drive to unite the PCs with the Wildrose Party.

Jasvir Deol, the NDP MLA for Edmonton-Meadows, called for Kenney to apologize. The premier was not in Tuesday's question period to take Opposition questions on the issue.

IN THE CLOSET CONSERVATIVES

Burqa isn’t choice

Ayesha Ijaz Khan

Published September 26, 2021 - 

The writer is a lawyer based in London.


SEVERAL years ago, when I started working as a lawyer in Karachi, as I was walking to my office inside a large building, which housed several offices, a man from an adjacent office, who looked like he could be my father’s age, stopped me and said, “Beta, dupatta kidhar hai?”

“It’s none of your business whether I wear a dupatta or not,” I retorted, and he backed down apologising. However, the incident stuck with me. The idea that a complete stranger could tell me what to wear wasn’t alien to me. I had grown up in Saudi Arabia, where an entire brigade of men called the mutawa, were tasked with going around town to check how many strands of hair were showing from women’s hijabs and admonish them and their next-of-kin males accordingly.

However, when I am told that women choose to wear a hijab, niqab or burqa, I find the notion completely fanciful. Some may certainly be choosing it, but a large number are not. Particularly those who live in Muslim-majority countries, where free choice has never been part of our ethos.

In Pakistan, for instance, isn’t it quite common for parents to decide who their children should marry or which profession they should pursue?

Free choice has never been part of our ethos.

One hundred per cent free choice doesn’t exist anywhere in the world, as there are always some norms and bounds that society dictates. For instance, nudity isn’t considered acceptable in public places and a University of California, Berkeley, student who attempted it back in 1992 was promptly arrested. Nevertheless, the amount of leeway one is given in choosing one’s life path, activities, and indeed dress is far more restrictive in our societies than it is in Western ones.

A cousin who moved from the US to UAE once told me that she had more freedom organising and attending Islamic religious lectures (dars) in the US than she did in the UAE, where the subject was strictly regulated by the state.

One only has to compare university campuses in Western countries with those in Pakistan to find how much freedom young adults have in terms of how freely they can come and go from campus or organise for a political cause. Many girls will tell you their dads do not allow them to wear sleeveless shirts or dance at functions where both men and women are present, while boys may be told that they need to marry off their sisters before they can think of marrying themselves.

So free choice plays very little role in our culture and society. This then brings us to the question — why do women wear the hijab, niqab or burqa? Primarily, it is because they are told that this is what their religion requires of them. But also, some young girls have told me that wearing a hijab leads to less familial constraint on their comings and goings, as male family members feel they have become religious and hence doubt them less. Others feel the extra clothing may fend off unwanted stares and advances.

One girl I recently spoke to told me that she wore a burqa when she went to study in China, thinking that it will make her safer as this is what she had been conditioned to believe in Pakistan. However, after a while she realised that the burqa was attracting undue attention in China and yet not serving the purpose it was supposed to. She said she soon realised that women in China were generally safe without wearing the burqa so she too took it off.

So the crux of the matter is making women feel safe in a public space. The questions to ask are: in societies where a large number of women are veiling, are women safe to walk on the streets alone? Are they safe at bus stops or driving cars alone or are they participating fully in public life? Or are they holding back, still fearful of unwanted advances from men, and yet not realising their potential?

I must add here that the hijab, a head covering alone, does not constrain women from doing most things that women without a hijab can do, but a niqab and burqa certainly do. They make public interface much more difficult. How many of us would be comfortable with a doctor or a nurse or a lawyer who veils her face? The idea of the face veil is to relegate women to a position where they have minimal public space.

This is not only detrimental for women but society at large. Emphasis on veiling often leads to calls for segregation of the sexes, which simply isn’t feasible in most real-life work situations. Saudi Arabia has learned this as it tries to diversify its economy and has reversed stricter veiling policies it promoted earlier.

As the Taliban take hold of Afghanistan and impose harsh conditions on women, it is more important than ever for other Muslim countries to speak out against such regressive interpretations of our religion, which are incompatible with modernity.

The writer is a lawyer based in London.
Twitter: @ayeshaijazkhan
Published in Dawn, September 26th, 2021

ANOTHER INTERNECINE LEADERSHIP RACE

Poilievre pitches to new immigrants, as Brown attacks him over 2015 niqab ban bill

OTTAWA — Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown and high-profile Conservative Pierre Poilievre spent Monday battling over a seven-year-old election promise to prohibit face coverings during citizenship ceremonies — a sign of what could be the makings of a tense rivalry between candidates in the Tory leadership race.

© Provided by The Canadian Press

Brown, who launched his bid on Sunday, blasted longtime Ottawa-area MP Poilievre over his actions back in 2015 when the party promised to create a "barbaric cultural practices" tip line and require people's faces to be visible during citizenship oaths.

The attack came as Poilievre spent the past few days meeting with cultural community leaders in the Greater Toronto Area and promising to cut red tape for immigrants wanting to access the necessary licences they need to work in regulated industries. Among those he met with were members of the Armenian, Muslim and Pakistani communities as well some of the party's candidates from the area.

Regardless of who is chosen as leader Sept. 10, Conservatives know they must make inroads with immigrants and racialized Canadians if theyhope to pick up seats in the region as well as other major cities and suburbs, considered key to defeating three-term Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Poilievre pledged Monday to revive similar programs that were in place under the last Conservative leader who did well in communities of visible minorities: former prime minister Stephen Harper, at least prior to 2015.

He promised toincentivize provinces to require occupational licensing bodies to decide on an immigrant's application within 60 days of receiving their paperwork, rather than forcing them to wait for months.

As well, Poilievre pitched offering small loans to immigrants who might need to take extra courses to gain a professional or trade licence to work in their respective field.

As Poilievre made these pledges, Brown, who is positioning himself as the candidate who stands for religious freedoms, released a statement saying the MP lacks credibility on any policy that impacts minority communities given his role in the Conservatives' 2015 election campaign.

It was during that race when the party, then led by Harper, promised to create a tip line for so-called "barbaric cultural practices." Conservatives at the time said it was meant to report things like forced marriage.

During that election, Poilievre was running for re-election as a candidate. He was also a member of Harper's government when it introduced a bill banning people from wearing face coverings during citizenship ceremonies. That was ultimately struck down in court. The promise was also included in the party's election campaign, when Harper also mused about possibly extending it to federal public servants.

Brown said Monday that Poilievre has never spoken out against these measures. The MP also has Jenni Byrne on his team, who was the party's national campaign manager in 2015.

"This is the same campaign which platformed those two abhorrent policies, and lost the Conservatives the 2015 general election," Brown's statement read.

"Even if he attempts to distance himself from his silence today, it would be a hollow gesture in an insincere bid to gain votes."

Poilievre responded Monday by calling Brown a "liar," accusing him of mischaracterizing what Harper was doing.

"There was no niqab ban," he said in a statement released on social media.

"I would never support that, nor did Mr. Harper. What Mr. Harper proposed was that a person's face be visible while giving oaths at citizenship ceremonies."

Poilievre, whose statement didn't address the past proposal of a "barbaric cultural practices" tip line, added he would continue to support immigration and equality.

In response, National Council of Canadians CEO Mustafa Farooq tweeted that "leadership requires accountability" and pointed out some of Poilievre's fellow MPs have apologized for what happened in 2015.

Among those is Edmonton MP Tim Uppal, a co-chair on Poilievre's campaign, who has apologized for his role as a minister in promoting the ban on niqabs during citizenship ceremonies.Before the leadership race, Uppal said the party was still dealing with the fallout from racialized communities because of the 2015 campaign.

A post-mortem from the Conservatives' 2021 election loss submitted in January came to a similar finding, according to three sources who spoke to The Canadian Press on the condition of anonymity.

Melissa Lantsman, a newly elected Ontario MP who is also supporting Poilievre in the race, shared on social media last fall that while she was stood in favour of banning the niqab during citizenship ceremonies in 2015, her "view has since evolved."

Michael Diamond, a campaign strategist who, among other campaigns, worked on Peter MacKay's 2020 Conservative leadership bid, said Brown's attack over the issue and targeting of Byrne is a "proxy" attack on Harper, who is highly respected among the membership.

"It seems like folly to me to attack the last campaign of the man who remains the most popular figure in this party."

He added it's still early days in the race and cautioned that the debates playing out between the campaigns and on social media were occurring in an "echo chamber."

This report by The Canadian Press was first published March 14, 2022.

Stephanie Taylor, The Canadian Press

HINDUTVA INJUSTICE IS SYSTEMIC
India court upholds ban on hijab in schools and colleges

By SHEIKH SAALIQ

1 of 11

Indian students in uniform clothing walk inside the campus of a government-run junior college in Udupi, Karnataka state, India, Feb. 24, 2022. Muslim students in this southern Indian state have found themselves at the center of a debate over hijab bans in schools. The furor began in January when staffers at the college began refusing admission to girls who showed up in a hijab, saying they were violating the uniform code. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)


NEW DELHI (AP) — An Indian court Tuesday upheld a ban on wearing hijab in class in the southern state of Karnataka, saying the Muslim headscarf is not an essential religious practice of Islam in a ruling that is likely to further deepen religious tensions in the country.

The high court in Karnataka state delivered the verdict after considering petitions filed by Muslim students challenging a government ban on hijabs that some schools and colleges have implemented in the last two months. The ban does not extend to other Indian states, but the court ruling could set a precedent for the rest of the country.

The dispute began in January when a government-run school in Karnataka’s Udupi district barred students wearing hijabs from entering classrooms, triggering protests by Muslims who said they were being deprived of their fundamental rights to education and religion. That led to counterprotests by Hindu students wearing saffron shawls, a color closely associated with that religion and favored by Hindu nationalists.

More schools in the state followed with similar bans and the state’s top court disallowed students from wearing hijab and any religious clothing pending a verdict.

The court in its ruling said the state government had the power to prescribe uniform guidelines for students as a “reasonable restriction on fundamental rights.”

The ruling came at a time when violence and hate speech against Muslims have increased under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s governing Hindu nationalist party, which also governs Karnataka state. Over the last few weeks, the issue has become a flashpoint for the battle over the rights of Muslims, who fear they are being shunted aside as a minority in India and see hijab bans as a worrying escalation of Hindu nationalism under Modi’s government.

Some rights activists have voiced concerns that the ban could increase Islamophobia.

“No one can understand our anxiousness about what is to follow,” Afreen Fatima, a New Delhi-based student activist, wrote on Twitter. “The court’s Hijab ban is a great injustice and a very worrying precedence. The scale of its repercussion is going to be brutal and inhuman.”

Karnataka’s education minister B. C. Nagesh told reporters that female Muslim students who were protesting against the ban must respect the court’s verdict and return to classes. He said his government will try to win the hearts of “misguided” students and “bring them in mainstream of education.”

Some Muslim politicians called the verdict disappointing.

“I hope this judgement will not be used to legitimize harassment of hijab-wearing women,” said Asaduddin Owaisi, a member of the Indian parliament.

Ahead of the verdict, the Karnataka government banned large gatherings for a week in state capital Bengaluru “to maintain public peace and order” and declared a holiday Tuesday in schools and colleges in Udupi.

The hijab is worn by many Muslim women to maintain modesty or as a religious symbol, often seen as not just a bit of clothing but something mandated by their faith.

Hijab restrictions have surfaced elsewhere, including France, which in 2004 banned them in schools. But in India, where Muslims make up 14% of the country’s 1.4 billion people, the hijab has historically been neither prohibited nor limited in public spheres. Women donning the headscarf is common across the country, which has religious freedom enshrined in its national charter with the secular state as a cornerstone.

Hijab bans deepen Hindu-Muslim fault lines in Indian state


By SHEIKH SAALIQ


UDUPI, India (AP) — When Aliya Assadi was 12, she wore a hijab while representing her southern Indian state of Karnataka at a karate competition. She won gold.

Five years later she tried to wear one to her junior college, the equivalent of a U.S. high school. She never made it past the campus gate, turned away under a new policy barring the religious headgear.

“It’s not just a piece of cloth,” Assadi said while visiting a friend’s house. She wore a niqab, an even more concealing garment that veils nearly the entire face with just a slit for the eyes, which she dons when away from home. “Hijab is my identity. And right now what they’re doing is taking away my identity from me.”

She’s one of countless Muslim students in Karnataka who have found themselves thrust into the center of a stormy debate about banning the hijab in schools and the Islamic head coverings’ place in this Hindu-majority but constitutionally secular nation.

Indian Muslim student Aliya Assadi dons a niqab, a concealing garment that veils nearly the entire face with just a slit for the eyes, as she arrives at her friend's house in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

The issue has become a flashpoint for the battle over the rights of Muslims, who fear they are being shunted aside as a minority in India and see hijab restrictions as a worrying escalation of Hindu nationalism under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government.

On Tuesday, an Indian court upheld the ban, saying the Muslim headscarf is not an essential religious practice of Islam.

The hijab is worn by many Muslim women to maintain modesty or as a religious symbol, often seen as not just a bit of clothing but something mandated by their faith. Opponents consider it a symbol of oppression, imposed on women. Hijab supporters deny that and say it has different meanings depending on the individual, including as a proud expression of Muslim identity.

A veiled Indian Muslim student, her hands decorated with henna, talks to her friend as they gather to meet student activists in Kundapur in district Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

The furor began in January in India, where Muslims make up just 14% of the country’s 1.4 billion people but are still numerous enough to make it the second-largest Muslim population of any nation, after Indonesia.

Staffers at a government-run junior college in Udupi, a coastal city in Karnataka, began refusing admission to girls who showed up in a hijab, saying they were violating the uniform code.

The students protested by camping outside and holding their lessons there, arguing that Muslim students had long been allowed to wear headscarves at school. More schools in the state soon imposed similar bans, prompting demonstrations by hundreds of Muslim women.

That led to counterprotests by Hindu students wearing saffron shawls, a color closely associated with that religion and favored by Hindu nationalists. They shouted slogans like “Hail Lord Ram,” a phrase that traditionally was used to celebrate the Hindu deity but has been co-opted by nationalists.

At one campus a boy climbed a flagpole and hoisted a saffron flag to cheers from friends. At another a girl in a hijab was met by shouted Hindu slogans from a group of boys; she raised her fist and cried, “Allahu akbar!” — “God is great,” in Arabic.

India's Hindu right wing Bajrang Dal activists donning saffron scarves and waving saffron flags demand a probe in the recent killing of one of their associates in Karnataka's Shivamogga district, during a protest rally in Udupi, Karnataka, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

To quell tensions the state, governed by Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party, shut schools and colleges for three days. It then slapped a statewide ban on the hijab in classes, saying “religious clothing” in government-run schools “disturbs equality, integrity and public law and order.”

Some students gave in and attended with their heads uncovered. Others refused and have been barred from school for nearly two months — students like Ayesha Anwar, an 18-year-old in Udupi who has missed exams and is falling behind her peers.

“I feel like we are being let down by everyone,” Anwar said while surrounded by friends in a dimly lit cafe, her voice barely a whisper from behind her cloth veil.

Muslim student Ayesha Anwar, 18, chats with her friends at a cafe in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. Anwar has missed exams and is falling behind her peers, after wearing of the hijab was banned in schools. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Six students sued to overturn the state’s ban, now upheld by the court, arguing it violates their rights to education and religious freedom. One of the plaintiffs to the challenge was Aliya Assadi.

“I’m an Indian and a Muslim,” she said. “When I see this with the point of view of a Muslim, I see my hijab is at a stake, and as an Indian, I see my constitutional values have been violated.”

There’s a cost to her activism: Hindu nationalists doxxed her personal details on social media, unleashing a flood of online abuse and harassment. She lost friends who depicted her actions as Muslim fundamentalism.

But she’s steadfast about wearing the hijab. She first did so as a child, imitating her mother, carefully arranging the headscarf in front of the mirror each morning. Today she enjoys the privacy it affords and the sense of religious pride it conveys: “It makes me confident.”

Indian Muslim student Aliya Assadi, left, holds her mobile phone as she interacts with a friend in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Ayesha Imtiaz, another student barred from school, said she wears it as a token of devotion to Islam but acknowledged that opinions vary even among Muslim women.

“There are so many of my friends who do not wear hijab inside the classroom,” said Imtiaz, 20. “They feel empowered in their own way, and I feel empowered in my own way.”

In her eyes, the bans segregate women according to faith and contravene core Indian values on diversity.

“It’s Islamophobia,” Imtiaz said.

Hijab restrictions have surfaced elsewhere, including France, which in 2004 banned them in schools. Other European countries have enacted regulations for public spaces, usually aimed at the more concealing garments such as niqabs and burqas. Usage of head coverings has divided even some Muslim communities.

In India, the hijab has historically been neither prohibited nor limited in public spheres. Women donning the headscarf is common across the country, which has religious freedom enshrined in its national charter with the secular state as a cornerstone.

An Indian Muslim girl wearing a hijab runs past others wearing burqas during an evening at a beach in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

But critics of Modi say India has steadily drifted from that commitment to secularism and today is deeply fractured along religious lines. The prime minister and top Cabinet officials often perform Hindu rituals and prayers on television, blurring the lines between religion and the state.

Since coming into office in 2014, Modi’s government has passed a raft of laws that opponents call anti-Muslim, though his party rejects accusations of being discriminatory.

Meanwhile calls for violence against Muslims have moved from society’s fringes toward the mainstream. Watchdog groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have warned that attacks could escalate against Muslims, who are disproportionately represented in India’s most impoverished neighborhoods and in prisons.

Some of the anti-Islam sentiment has specifically targeted women — recently many in the country were outraged by a website that was set up offering a fake “auction” of more than 100 prominent Indian Muslim women, including journalists, activists, artists and movie stars.

People hold placards and candles in Bengaluru, India, during a protest against banning Muslim girls from wearing the hijab in educational institutions in southern Karnataka state. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Muslim students allege that behind the counterprotests in Karnataka was Hindu Jagran Vedike, a nationalist group associated with Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a far-right Hindu organization ideologically linked to Modi’s political party.

Mahesh Bailur, a senior member of Hindu Jagran Vedike, denied that his group organized demonstrations and said it only offered “moral support” to the saffron shawls and their cause.

“Today these girls are demanding hijab in colleges. Tomorrow they will want to pray there. Finally, they’ll want separate classrooms for themselves,” he said. “This is unacceptable.”

Bailur, 36, is a proponent of a discredited conspiracy theory that holds Muslims are plotting to convert India’s Hindu population and eventually remake it as an Islamic nation. Demands to wear the hijab in classes, he argued, are part of that.

Manavi Atri, a human rights lawyer based in Bengaluru, the capital of Karnataka, said the hijab ban is among many assaults on expressions of Muslim identity in India today, violates principles of state neutrality on religious matters, and inflates an “us-versus-them philosophy” in a country already riven by sectarian divisions. Most troubling, she said, is the pressure it puts on girls and young women in their formative years.

“This choice (between education and faith) that people are being forced to make is not a choice one has to be exercising at that age,” she said.

A girl in uniform walks into the government-run junior college with a Muslim student wearing burqa in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

In the court case, lawyers for Karnataka state argued that the Quran does not clearly establish wearing the hijab as an essential spiritual practice, so banning it does not violate religious freedom.

Many Muslims reject that interpretation.

On a recent Friday, Rasheed Ahmad, the head imam of Udupi’s grand mosque, delivered a sermon before hundreds of worshippers. His voice thundering through loudspeakers mounted on the minarets, he railed against the bans as an attack on Islam.

“Hijab is not just our right,” he said later in an interview, “but an order from God.”

Assadi said she and the others are determined to prevail.

“We are brave Muslim women,” she said, “and we know how to fight for our rights.”

Indian Muslim students spend time at a cafe after they were denied entry into their college for wearing the hijab in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Police officers stand guard at a gate of the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial college after hijab wearing Muslim girl students were denied entry into the campus in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)
ADVERTISEMENT



Indian students in uniform clothing walk inside the campus of a government-run junior college in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

A Muslim girl wearing a hijab checks photographs taken on her mobile phone at a beach in Udupi, Karnataka state. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Rasheed Ahmad, the head imam of Udupi's grand mosque, teaches the Quran to children in Udupi, Karnataka state, India. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

Indian Muslim students wearing burqas leave Mahatma Gandhi Memorial college after they were denied entry into the campus in Udupi, Karnataka state, India, Feb. 24, 2022. (AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi)

___

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

SEE LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for HINDUISM IS FASCISM 

Documentary 'Sabaya' shows rescue of 'IS' sex slaves

Hogir Hirori's award-winning documentary portrays the struggles of activists determined to save Yazidi girls and women who were captured by the "Islamic State."



The niqab makes it difficult to identify Yazidis living in the camp

Right at the beginning of the film Sabaya, the defeat of the "Islamic State" (IS) terror group in Syria is announced on the radio.

But the news doesn't have much impact on the task undertaken by Mahmud and Ziyad, volunteers of the Yazidi Home Center. They are on their way to the notoriously dangerous internment camp al-Hol, where an estimated 73,000 individuals from 58 countries — most of them suspected supporters and families of IS militants — are living in tents.

Hidden among them are Yazidi girls and women who were kidnapped by IS to serve as sex slaves, called "sabaya."

The abductions took place five years earlier, when IS captured the province of Sinjar in Iraq. The 2014 massacre against the Yazidis in the region marked the beginning of the genocide of the ancient religious minority.

Watch video 12:03 Aftermath of a genocide: Yazidis of Sinjar Immersive cinema

Mahmud, Ziyad and the small team of the Yazidi Home Center work to locate and save the captive Yazidi — and filmmaker Hogir Hirori joined them to document their dangerous rescue missions.

As one expedition leads to a car chase and a shoot-out on a bumpy road, Hirori's camera stays still, not missing a second of the action. "But I didn't expect to survive that," the filmmaker told DW through an interpreter at the German premiere of his film.

Sabaya opened the Human Rights Film Festival Berlin, held as a hybrid online and on-site event from September 16-25. Even though the Berlin event was the first the director could personally attend due to COVID, Sabaya has already been shown at 30 international festivals, winning the 2021 World Documentary Directing Award at Sundance among other prizes.

Documentary filmmaker Hogir Hirori

The director, who has been living living in Sweden since 1999, was born in Kurdistan, not too far from Sinjar. Sabaya is his third film in a trilogy on the impact of war in the region, following The Girl Who Saved My Life (2014) and The Deminer (2017).

Through his immersive filmmaking style, Hirori offers the audience rare access to the al-Hol camp. Even though many of the detainees have since been relocated, it is estimated that there are still more than 60,000 refugees in the overcrowded camp controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), a Kurdish-led military alliance that served as a partner of the US in the war on IS in Syria.

To gain the trust of the Yazidi Home Center team and the people they rescue, the documentary filmmaker spent a long period with them: "When they accepted to let me film, they expected me to stay a day or two, or maybe a week, but I was with them for a year and a half," Hogir said.

Children sold from one violent man to the other

What makes the documentary particularly poignant is the stories shared by the women and girls following their rescue from al-Hol.

Some of them were only 12 when they were abducted, right after they had to witness the killing of their entire family.

One survivor recounts how she was sold to 15 different men, who beat her up so badly she ended up with a hole in her head and missing teeth.

Another rescued Yazidi child shown in the film was taken as a 1-year-old baby.
Mothers separated from their rape-born children

Before they return to Sinjar, the rescued women and children are temporarily taken care of by Mahmud's family. His mother cooks for them and his young son plays with them, offering a calming refuge from years of atrocities, but the survivors are caught between dealing with their past trauma and facing bleak perspectives for the future. Not only their family has been decimated, they fear being stigmatized as a former sabaya.

The situation is particularly wrenching for women with children born from IS fathers, since they cannot return to their community with the kids; the Supreme Yazidi Spiritual Council has determined they could not accept children born from rape.

Yazidi women cannot return to their community with a rape-born child

Complicating matters, as Hirori points out, according to Iraqi laws, those children are automatically born as Muslims and must therefore be raised as Muslims. For now, the filmmaker says, the only available solution is to relocate the Yazidi mothers and their children to another country.

Risking his life to make this film even though he also has young children, one of Hirori's main motivations was to reactivate the calls for action from the international community: "I wanted to make this documentary so no one could say I didn't know or never heard of it," he said at the film festival in Berlin.

Also risking their life are the volunteers of the Yazidi Home Center, which includes former sabaya agreeing to work as infiltrators in the al-Hol camp to track down Yazidi detainees amid the mass of IS women who are instrumental in keeping them captive.

Adding to the challenge of identifying the captive Yazidi, the women are to wear a niqab, the dress ultra-conservative female Muslims wear to cover the faces.

Activists collect photos of the missing Yazidi in their efforts to rescue them

In the film, Mahmud and Ziyad are in constant communication with the infiltrators, spending their days and nights preparing the next rescue mission, comparing pictures of the captive Yazidis, equipped only with a cell phone with a bad internet connection.
Still thousands missing

The Yazidi Home Center managed to save 206 people. Of the estimated 7,000 Yazidi girls and women who have been enslaved by IS since 2014, there are between 2,000 - 2,800 still missing, according to various estimates.

Since the completion of the film, Ziyad, the director of the Yazidi Home Center had to flee Syria due to increased IS attacks, but he keeps on working on reuniting Yazidi mothers with their children from abroad. Mahmud's home is also a target and can no longer serve as a shelter for the girls.

Hirori hopes that larger government bodies will get involved to save these women who have been largely forgotten by the international community amid other crises: "If individual activists, only equipped with a mobile phone with a poor connection and a small gun can achieve so much, then a major organization can do much more."

THE PLIGHT OF THE YAZIDI MINORITY IN IRAQ

The Yazidis: A history of persecution

For hundreds of years, the Yazidi community has been persecuted for its religious views, an amalgamation of Zoroastrianism, Christianity and Islam. Throughout their history, they have been killed, forced to convert to other religions and even taken as slaves. While the Kurdish-speaking minority community in northern Iraq had been attacked before, 2014 marked a tragic turning point in history.

12345

SEE

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=YEZIDI

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=YAZIDI

https://plawiuk.blogspot.com/search?q=YEZEDI

 Opinion

Sinead O’Connor was a rock star and a Muslim. Why did obituaries miss this?

Obscuring O’Connor’s faith is a missed chance to fight Islamophobia.

Irish musician Sinead O’Connor appears on “The Late Late Show” in Ireland in 2019. Video screen grab

August 8, 2023

By 

Anna Piela

(RNS) — Sinead O’Connor, the Irish singing star whose funeral was held Tuesday (Aug. 8) near Dublin, will always be connected with Roman Catholicism after she ripped a photo of Pope John Paul II in two on “Saturday Night Live” in 1992 to protest the church’s handling of sexual abuse by priests. The backlash dampened her success, and though she said she didn’t regret the moment, it defined her public image for the rest of her 56 years.

But the rites for her burial Tuesday were not Catholic but Muslim, and Sheikh Umar Al-Qadri, an Islamic scholar and the chief imam at the Islamic Center of Ireland, eulogized her as Shuhada Sadaqat, the name she took after converting to Islam. It’s not something the news media have reported much about, part of a seemingly willful ignorance that was more interested in her reputation as a rebellious and even sacrilegious celebrity.

For a long time, O’Connor’s relationship with religion was complicated. Many recent retrospectives, such as here and here, published after her death, comment on her spirituality. She was indeed repelled by much about religion, particularly inflexible religious labels. Yet she was constantly attracted to spirituality, and it powered her creative work. Her album “Theology” contains Hebrew Bible texts that she rearranged and set to music. In 2007, she declared that she had become a Rastafarian.

And she kept up her sometimes contentious conversation with Catholics. Tapping into the debate about women’s priesthood, she caused controversy in April 1999 when she announced she had become ordained as the first-ever priestess in the Latin Tridentine Church, a dissident Catholic group in her native Ireland. In 2019, she reflected on Catholic-dominated Ireland in an interview on “The Late Late Show”: “It was a very oppressed country, religiously speaking.”

---

RELATED: Why some Muslim women feel empowered wearing hijab, a headscarf

---

But O’Connor’s seeking phase ended when in 2018 she embraced Islam. What she told of that process was evocative of a statement I heard dozens of times from converts to Islam I interviewed for my book, “Wearing the Niqab: Muslim Women in the UK and the US.” In her interview on “The Late Late Show,” she said: “I had been a Muslim all my life and didn’t realize it. … I am home.”

This fact, that it was Islam that finally brought her peace, has been neglected entirely or treated as a footnote.

Her obituary in Vogue does not mention her Muslim faith at the time of her death but makes an obligatory note of the photo-tearing incident. The New York Times, The Washington Post and the Chicago Sun-Times all made only brief asides saying that she had converted and changed her name. (In its story today, The New York Times included more about her Muslim funeral.)

Her obituary in The Guardian, a British daily that usually aspires to be diversity-affirming, was puzzlingly insensitive when it came to noting her faith: “On her final concert tour, in 2019, she wore a hijab and abaya, but nothing else had changed — her voice still raised the hair on the back of the neck.”

Why would her voice or her talent change after conversion? Does the author imply that a Muslim woman would have less power as a performer? This statement feeds into prevalent stereotypes of Muslim women as silent and oppressed.

On its X (formerly Twitter) account, the Council on American-Islamic Relations argued that photos used in her obituaries — many of them pre-conversions photographs of O’Connor with bare arms and her head uncovered — would be counter to O’Connor’s adoption of a hijab and abaya.

Another CAIR post said, “We also urge the media to respect her acceptance of Islam by acknowledging the name she chose for herself, Shuhada’ Sadaqat, & using recent photos that depict how she chose to present herself.”

This sentiment was echoed by Khaled Beydoun, a prominent scholar of Islam: “Many Mainstream media outlets are overlooking or erasing Sinead — or Shahuda’s — Muslim identity.” (Another scholar of Islam, Amanullah De Sondy, points out that O’Connor’s gender-fluid identity is similarly being erased by the very same media outlets.)

O’Connor often used her birth name as a stage name, so using it for clarity is understandable. But to focus completely on her conflicted relationship with Catholicism oddly fails to explore what came after her entanglement with the religion of her homeland, and the religion that eventually brought her peace after a tumultuous faith journey.

---

RELATED: Women seek diverse paths to leadership in Islamic spaces

---

The obscuring of O’Connor’s Muslim faith by the mainstream media suggests that the Islamic faith is still seen as somehow incompatible with show business. Few Muslim female singers reach global fame on this scale, so it is disappointing that so few in the media saw O’Connor’s brilliant life as a chance to challenge Islamophobia. But more disappointing is that in remembering her, something so important as her religious agency — her religious choice, belief, practice and identity — was seen as an afterthought.

(Anna Piela, a visiting scholar in religious studies and gender at Northwestern University, is the author of “Wearing the Niqab: Muslim Women in the UK and the US.” She is also the senior writer at American Baptist Home Mission Societies and an ordained American Baptist Churches USA minister. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

 

Portugal enacts 'burqa law' banning face coverings in public space

Copyright AP Photo

By Joana Mourão Carvalho & Greta Ruffino

Published on 20/08/2026 -  EURONEWS

In Portugal, violators face fines ranging from €150 to €3,000, with exemptions for health, professional, artistic or weather-related reasons, as well as in places of worship, diplomatic missions and on aircraft.

Portugal's President António Jose Seguro has enacted a law banning face coverings in public spaces, a measure widely seen as targeting Muslim women who wear full-face veils.

"The face must be considered a central element of human identity and communication," Seguro said in a statement late Tuesday.

The legislation, dubbed the "burqa law" by local media, was approved by parliament in July with the support of the governing right-wing coalition and far-right parties. Left-wing parties voted against it.

The law prohibits clothing designed to conceal the face or prevent identification in public spaces. It also bans forcing someone to cover their face for reasons related to gender, religion, age or origin.

Seguro acknowledged that the issue was one of "great social and cultural sensitivity".

President of the Republic promulgated law after changes to Chega's proposal Miguel Figueiredo Lopes/Presidencia da Republica

Left-wing parties warn of Islamophobia risks and question security justification

The bill put forward by the far-right Chega party received negative opinions from the Portuguese Bar Association, the High Council of the Public Prosecutor's Office and the Portuguese Association of Women Lawyers, alongside concerns over its potential unconstitutionality.

The centre-left Socialist Party (PS), green-left Livre and the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP) opposed the proposal, warning it could fuel Islamophobia. It was backed by the centre-right Social Democratic Party (PSD).

The PS denounced "Islamophobic purpose that was evident in the explanatory memorandum [of the bill], the context of radicalism in which we live and the risks this creates for the communities directly targeted."

The PCP said the proposal had "nothing to do with women's rights, nor with security issues", but was "solely about fuelling hate speech and violence against those who are different, fuelling racist and xenophobic discourse."

Livre accused the right of "hypocrisy" and of conducting the debate in a "biased manner", in an attempt to create in Portugal "a moral panic over a supposed Islamic invasion that the far right so often talks about."

Full-face veil bans: How do rules compare across Europe?

Copyright Ritzau Scanpix

By Greta Ruffino & Joana Mourão Carvalho

Published on 20/08/2026 - EURONEWS

European countries take widely different approaches to full-face veils, from nationwide bans to restrictions in specific public spaces. Euronews looks at how the rules vary across the continent.

On Thursday, Portugal joined a growing list of European countries that have banned or restricted burqas and other full-face veils in public spaces.

But rules vary widely across the continent. Euronews breaks down how different European countries regulate face coverings.

France pioneered Europe’s face-covering ban

France became the first European country to ban full-face coverings in public spaces in 2011. Violations can result in a fine or mandatory civic education.

The French government argued that face coverings prevent people from being clearly identified, posing potential security risks and hindering social interaction in a society where facial recognition and expression play an important role in communication.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, questions were raised over whether protective face masks were compatible with the ban. Authorities later clarified that masks were permitted under existing health and safety exemptions.

Belgium: Fines and prison for violations

In Belgium, the ban dates back to 2011, with offenders facing fines or up to seven days in prison.

Alongside France, Belgium was one of the first European countries to introduce such restrictions, citing public security and social integration.

The law aims to facilitate communication and prevent people from concealing their identities in public spaces, measures Belgian authorities have defended as essential to ensuring the full participation of all citizens in society.

Bulgaria: Full-face veils restricted to private spaces

The wearing of burqas and other full-face veils has been banned in public spaces in Bulgaria since September 2016 and is restricted to private homes and places of worship. Muslims make up around 12% of Bulgaria's population.

Austria: Face-veil ban extended to schools

In Austria, a ban on full-face veils, including the burqa and niqab, came into force in 2017 under legislation known as the "Anti-Face-Veiling Act". The measure was introduced on security and integration grounds, with authorities arguing that face coverings hinder communication and social cohesion.

Additionally, in 2025, Austria's parliament approved a law banning Islamic headscarves for girls under the age of 14 in schools. The ban explicitly refers to "the headscarf that covers the head in accordance with Islamic tradition".

Denmark: A blanket ban on face coverings

Denmark enacted a full ban on face coverings in all public places in 2018. The law, which prohibits any clothing that conceals the face — including burqas and niqabs — has been justified primarily on grounds of public identification and societal transparency.

Nemesis founder Alice Cordier protests against a conference by Jean-Luc Mélenchon at Sciences Po in Paris on 22 April 2024, holding a sign reading "Burqa=obscene". (AP Photo/Thibault Camus)

Netherlands: Partial restrictions in key institutions

In the Netherlands, a 2019 law restricts face coverings in specific public settings — such as schools, hospitals, and public transport — where clear communication and identification are deemed essential.

While not a total ban, it reflects a growing inclination toward regulating religious expression in state spaces.

Germany: A fragmented approach to face-covering bans

Germany has taken a fragmented approach, with some states introducing partial bans in schools and public spaces on security and communication grounds. Specific restrictions also apply to certain professions and everyday situations.

While some regions consider such bans necessary to promote integration and social cohesion, others fear they could isolate certain communities and undermine social inclusion.

Luxembourg: Full-face veils restricted in public institutions

In Luxembourg, a law restricting the wearing of full-face veils came into force in spring 2018.

Face coverings are prohibited on public transport, in schools and on school grounds, in facilities for children under 16, hospitals, common areas of care homes for older people, including corridors and lifts, as well as in judicial buildings and public administration facilities open to the public.

Spain: Legal silence, local discretion

Spain lacks national legislation on the issue, leaving decisions to the discretion of schools and institutions.

In 2013, the Supreme Court backed a Madrid high school's decision to exclude a hijab-wearing student, setting a precedent but not a standard.

While Islamic groups have stressed that the Spanish Constitution and a 1992 cooperation agreement together protect the right to wear religious attire, the Ministry of Education has not prioritised national guidance, arguing that such cases are rare and manageable at the local level.

Portugal: Legal neutrality, selective application

Portugal doesn’t explicitly ban religious symbols but permits institutions — both public and private — to enforce neutral dress codes, as long as these are applied uniformly.

The aim is to protect employees from religious pressure while ensuring that workplaces remain ideologically neutral.

Italy: A law from another era

Italy does not have a specific ban on religious dress, but a 1975 anti-terrorism law prohibits face coverings in public.

Though originally unrelated to religious attire, this law has occasionally been invoked to restrict the niqab and burqa in certain public or security-sensitive environments.

Sweden: Freedom first, local pushback

Sweden has no national ban on religious attire, and the veil remains permitted across public life. The national approach favours individual rights, though some municipalities have attempted to impose school-specific restrictions, citing integration and gender equality. These moves have sparked debate but have not yet reshaped national policy

Greece: Legal protections with practical limits

Greek law offers robust anti-discrimination protections based on religion across employment and public services. Yet, practice has sometimes told a more complicated story. In one 2022 case, a hospital barred a nursing student from wearing a headscarf during her internship, citing uniform regulations.

The Greek Ombudsman ruled the policy did not violate anti-discrimination laws, framing it as a dress code issue, not a religious one.

Restrictions on face- or body-covering veils, varying in scope and extent, are also in place in countries across several continents, including China, Australia, Russia, Canada, Sri Lanka, Gabon, Chad, Senegal, the Republic of the Congo, Cameroon, Morocco, Algeria and others.

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BURQA

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for HIJAB

LA REVUE GAUCHE - Left Comment: Search results for BABUSHKA