Category Archives: Hijab

Muslim woman sues judge over veil

Posted on by Bob Pitt

DETROIT – A Muslim woman whose small-claims court case was dismissed after she refused to remove her veil sued the judge Wednesday, saying her religious and civil rights were violated. Ginnnah Muhammad, 42, of Detroit, says in the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Detroit that Judge Paul Paruk’s request to remove her veil – and his decision to dismiss her case when she didn’t – was unconstitutional based on her First Amendment right to practice her religion.

Muhammad wore a niqab during the October hearing in Hamtramck, a city surrounded by Detroit. She was contesting a $2,750 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had broken into. Paruk told her he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness and gave her a choice: take off the veil while testifying or have the case dismissed. She kept it on.

Associated Press, 28 March 2007

Now Muslims can wear veils in ‘our’ courts

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Veils in 'our' courts“Muslim women were yesterday given the full backing of the law to wear veils in court – even if they are standing trial for crimes. Defendants who are told they must remove their face-covering garment could even be allowed to give evidence in secret so as not to offend them. Senior judges ruled that religious dress – including the full niqab which leaves only the eyes exposed – should be allowed for anyone involved in a court case unless justice is threatened….

“Last night critics said the guidance undermines the most basic of principles – that justice must be seen to be done. Tory MP Philip Davies said: ‘People are entitled to see what is going on. All this pussy-footing around, judges have no comprehension of the damage they’re doing for community cohesion by coming out with this barmy stuff’.”

Daily Express, 25 April 2007

See also the Express editorial, headed “Disgraceful veil rule will fuel further anger”, which opines:

“The decision to give the green light for full-face veils to be worn in court by lawyers, witnesses and even defendants drives a coach and horses – or should that be a camel train? – through British legal tradition…. On Monday the Treasury announced it will set up sharia-approved financial products especially for Muslims. Yesterday the legal establishment took the first step towards allowing British Muslims to regulate their interactions with the courts according to sharia law. The British people will not put up with these crazy acts of cultural surrender for much longer.”

Indistinguishable from the sort of thing you might read on the BNP website, isn’t it?

‘Hijab: a political symbol’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

“Re: ‘The hijab is more than a head cover; Around the world similar head gear provides security and a tie to culture’ (Opinion, April 23). The hijab is indeed more than head cover. In some countries it is a symbol of what patriarchal societies do to dominate and oppress women. Something to celebrate here in Hamilton on the McMaster campus? I think not. The hijab in the West is more a cultural and political symbol than it is religious apparel. In some cases it represents the most radical and fundamentalist political views of Islam today.”

Letter in Hamilton Spectator, 25 April 2007

Uncovering being Muslim in post-9/11 Melbourne

Posted on by Bob Pitt

With a predominantly Islamic population, Indonesia’s Muslims see their faith reflected at every turn: in media, in government policy, in education, even in fashion and food. But next door in Australia things are very different.

With little more than 1 percent of its population Islamic, there is little or no reflection of Australian Muslim society, except when something goes wrong. And that lack of positive societal recognition for one particular religious group is causing social ostracism for many Australian Muslims, particularly in these years following Sept. 11, 2001.

The fallout from that disaster half a world away has shaken Australia’s multicultural foundations, with ordinary Australian Muslims made social pariahs, as Chinese-Indonesians were denied Indonesian citizenship rights until recently, and as many Australian Aborigines are given unequal treatment simply for being black.

Jakarta Post, 24 April 2007

Italy asks Muslim groups to join ‘values charter’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Italy’s interior ministry has published a “values charter” for religious minorities that promotes integration while shunning polygamy and the wearing of face-concealing veils. Regarding the veil, it says that while “no restrictions on clothing exist in Italy … (veils that) cover the face are not acceptable because they prevent the recognition of the person and are an obstacle for establishing relationships with others.”

AFP, 24 April 2007

‘In this country we are able to dress, or undress, exactly as we see fit’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Manal OmarIn a letter to the Guardian, one Linda Allan of Bath responds to Manal Omar’s article detailing the hostility she faced when wearing an “Islamic-style” swimsuit at a fitness club in Oxford:

“I’ll tell you why you shouldn’t go swimming like this in Britain; it’s because women in this country are equal to men and are not obliged to cover themselves up when swimming – or indeed at any other time – because some men somewhere have decided that’s how it has to be.

“Women in Britain fought for and died for the right to be equal. In this country we are able to dress, or undress, exactly as we see fit. If that’s not your choice, poor you. But don’t be surprised when people mock you and pass comment on your totally inappropriate clothing for swimming.”

Happily, most of the other letters are in support of Manal Omar.

Muslim veil ‘allowed in courts’

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Muslim women will be allowed to wear a veil in court under new guidelines issued following a dispute last year. The Judicial Studies Board’s Equal Treatment Advisory Committee examined whether women should be allowed to wear the full facial covering, the niqab. Decisions should be made on each case and veils should not interfere with the administration of justice, it found.

BBC News, 24 April 2007

See also Judicial Communications Office news release, 24 April 2007

And IHRC press release, 24 April 2007

Far right Danish MPs compare Islamic veil to Nazi swastika

Posted on by Bob Pitt

Three Danish lawmakers, all members of the anti-immigration Danish People’s Party, have been reported to police for making remarks comparing Muslim women’s headscarves with swastikas. Parliament member Soeren Krarup was cited in daily Politiken and other Danish media on April 18 as saying that Muslim women’s headscarves, like Nazi Germany’s swastikas, symbolized totalitarian repression. Fellow lawmaker Morten Messerschmidt and a party representative in the European Parliament, Mogens Camre, repeated Krarup’s comments in Danish media today.

Krarup made his comments after Asmaa Abdol-Hamid, a Muslim politician from the Red-Green Alliance Party, said she would wear her headscarf if elected to Denmark’s parliament. Krarup confirmed today on his party’s Web site that he believes there are “common features between the Muslim veiling of women and other totalitarian symbols. The Danish People’s Party would like to underline that this is not a critique of the individual woman, who may wear a headscarf, but a general critique of Islam’s veiling of women,” he said.

Bloomberg.com. 20 April 2007

See also DPA, 20 April 2007

Muslim girl barred from taekwondo tournament over hijab

Posted on by Bob Pitt

MONTREAL – A Muslim girl barred from competing in a taekwondo tournament because of her hijab was adamant yesterday that she would give up neither her sport nor her head covering. “I won’t take it off for any reason,” said 11-year-old Bissan Mansour. “Even if I can’t go to tournaments, I can continue to practise until I become world champion.”

Bissan and four of her teammates, all Muslims of Lebanese descent from the Ultimate Tae Kwon Do Club in Montreal, were told they could not compete in the Raymond Mourad provincial tournament in Longueuil unless they removed their hijabs, which were deemed a safety risk that violated competition rules.

Ottawa Citizen, 16 April 2007