Western Resistance

« Thailand: Bombing Kills Three In Teashop In Muslim South | | Spain: Catholic Church Produces Muslim Schoolbook »

October 20, 2006

UK: The Muslim Veil Row Continues

The debate on the wearing of the face-covering Muslim veil (nikab or niqab) has raged in Britain since October 5, when Britain's former foreign secretary, Jack Straw, wrote a column in his local newspaper, the Lancashire Telegraph. Here, he described his discomfort when encountering women wearing the veil in his constituency at Blackburn. He said that he asked the women if they would remove the item, as it hindered communication. He wrote that the veil was becoming worn increasingly, and was a sign of "separation".

Since then, various politicians have commented on the veil, mostly favorably. On October 8, deputy prime minister John Prescott said on the BBC TV program "Sunday AM": "If a woman wants to wear a veil, why shouldn't she? It's her choice."

The chancellor, Gordon Brown, said on October 10 was asked whether he would "prefer it and think it better for Britain if fewer people wore veils". Brown replied by saying: "That is what Jack Straw has said and I support (it)....I would emphasise the importance of what we do to integrate people into our country, including the language and including history."

The following day, October 11, premier Tony Blair was pressed on the veil issue by the BBC as he stood outside Downing Street on a rain morning. Clutching an umbrella in one hand and a mug of tea in the other, he said: "I think in the end, it's a matter of them choosing what they want to do....But I think the reason why Jack raised this is because these are issues that people do feel quite strongly about and they are trying to say how do we make sense of a different type of society in which we live, how do we make sure people integrate more, how do we make sure that people aren't sort of wanting to separate themselves out from the mainstream of society....It's a difficult and tricky debate to enter into, as we can see over the past few days"

On the same day, Salman Rushdie, again speaking to the BBC, said that he supported Jack Straw. On the Today program on Radio 4, the 59-year old novelist (who had been subjected to a death sentence in a fatwa issued by Ayatollah Khomeini in February, 1989) said: "He was expressing an important opinion which is that veils suck - which they do. Speaking as somebody with three sisters and a very largely female Muslim family, there is not a single woman I know in my family or in their friends who would have accepted the wearing of a veil."

"The battle against the veil has been a long and continuing battle against the limitation of women so, in that sense, I am completely on his side. I think the veil is a way of taking power away from women."

On October 13, it was revealed that a woman assistant teacher had been suspended from the Headfield Church of England Junior School in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire. She had refused to remove her veil while teaching. She had been employed to assist children whose first language was not English, and children had complained that they could not understand her.

The teacher, 23-year old Aishah Azmi, a mother of two, had complained that she was being discriminated against on religious grounds. She was taking the issue of her suspension to an employment tribunal with Kirklees Council. The MP for Dewsbury, Shahid Malik, said that he supported the school's decision. He said: "In schools the top priority has got to be the education of our children. I fully support the decision of the education authority and the school in requesting the classroom assistant remove her veil when teaching primary school children."

"I believe the education authority has bent over backwards to be accommodating and has been extremely reasonable and sensible in the decision it has come to. There is no religious obligation whatsoever for Muslim women to cover themselves up in front of primary school children."

A Muslim member of the Dewsbury South local council, Imtiaz Ameen, agreed. He said: "It's not conducive to learning at that age to cover your face, when there is no requirement to do so. Her position is unreasonable."

The majority of the 529 children at the school are of Pakistani or Bangladeshi origin. Jim Dodds, a spokesman for Kirklees Council's children's services said that the suspension of Ms Azmi had "nothing to do with religion." He stated: "We are simply trying to ensure that our children get the best possible education. Both pupils and teachers raised concerns because they were finding it difficult to make out what she was saying during lessons. We have a lot of pupils who do not speak English as a first language and you have to be able to see people's lips move when you are being taught. We asked this young lady to remove her veil when she was teaching English language, but she refused."

The issue intensified when on October 15 it was reported that Phil Woolas, the government's race and faith minister, had said that Aishah Azmi should be sacked. In an interview with the Sunday Mirror, Woolas said: "She cannot teach a classroom of children wearing a veil. You cannot have a teacher who wears a veil simply because there are men in the room. She is denying the right of children to a full education by insisting that she wears the veil. If she is saying that she won't work with men, she is taking away the right of men to work in schools.'

"By insisting that she will wear the veil if men are there, she's saying: 'I'll work with women, but not men'. That's sexual discrimination. No head-teacher could agree to that. There are limits in a liberal democracy. There are boundaries in a democracy and this is one of them. It's a boundary we can't cross," he claimed.

On a BBC TV News interview, she was asked by Peter Sissons if she had worn the veil to the interview when she had applied for the job and if a man had been present. She tried to evade the question, and only reluctantly admitted that a man had been present at her interview, and she had not worn the veil. The discussion can be found on YouTube.

On October 16, the Times quoted the Muslim MP for Dewsbury, Shahid Malik, who said he gave his support to Phil Woolas' comments that Aishah Azmi should be sacked. He said: "The basic thrust of what Phil says is just common sense. If you are not able to fulfil your job requirements then obviously it will be difficult for you to continue in that particular role."

On October 17, even Tony Blair claimed that he supported the school's decision to suspend Aishah Azmi. He said: "They (the school authorities) should be allowed to take that decision. I do support the authority in the way that they have handled this."

Specifically asked about Aishah Azmi, Blair said: "I simply say that I back their handling of the case. I can see the reason why they came to the decision they did. Difficult though these issues are, they need to be raised and confronted."

He also said that the veil was a "mark of separation" which made some people 'outside the community feel uncomfortable."

Yesterday, Aishah Azmi received the results of the employment tribunal. The verdict is reported by the Telegraph, the Times, the Guardian, the Independent, the BBC and the Lancashire Evening Telegraph.

Azmi has lost her claims that she was subjected to harassment on religious grounds and religious discrimination. These claims had been brought under the terms of the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2004. However, she was awarded damages. Kirklees Council was ordered to pay her £1,100 ($2,074) as the tribunal ruled that she had been victimized as a result of the environment surrounding the case.

The tribunal said that its decisions had been made on October 6, and therefore had not been influenced by the comments made by politicians. Azmi was not happy with the verdict.

She said: "It is clear that discrimination has taken place and I am disappointed the tribunal has not been able to uphold that part of my claim. I am pleased the tribunal recognised the victimising way in which the school and local education authority have handled this matter and the distress that has caused me."

When she was asked if she would ever remove the veil if males were present, she answered: "No. I teach perfectly well with my veil on. Just give it a chance - that's what I call integration."

Shahid Malik described the tribunal's decision as "quite clearly a victory for common sense."

Azmi is considering an appeal, and criticized the politicians who had spoken about her case. She does not seem to accept that she had flirted with the media, appearing on countless interviews with the BBC and others. If she was making comments about the case, then others can hardly be blamed for voicing their opinions.

She said after the tribunal's decision: "Muslim women who wear the veil are not aliens, and politicians need to recognise that what they say can have a very dangerous impact on the lives of the minorities they treat as outcasts. Integration requires people like me to be in the workplace so that people can see that we are not to be feared or mistrusted."

"I will continue to uphold my religious beliefs and urge Muslims to engage in dialogue with the wider community, despite the attacks that are being made upon them."

While the debate has raged in Britain about whether women who entirely cover their faces are really integrating or not, the leader of the opposition Conservative party, David Cameron, has called for "restraint". According to the Guardian and View London, Cameron has said that the debate about veils has led to the Muslim community in Britain feeling "slightly targeted."

He was speaking on ITV's Frost Tonight show yesterday evening. He said: " think there is a danger of politicians piling in to have their tenpenceworth and really they have to ask themselves whether this is having an overall good effect or not."

He said that local authorities should make their own decisions about the veil. He claimed: "I am not sure we can have some national veils policy. Looking at the case, I have great sympathy with the school, because it seems to me there isn't a teaching in Islam which says you have to wear the veil in front of children and in terms of teaching, communication is vitally important so that's where my sympathies lie."

Cameron is right. The only admonition against dress in the Koran comes in Sura 33 - Al-Ahzab (The Clans)- verse 59, which states: "O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they grow abroad). That will be better, that so they may be recognized and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful."

It appears that only modesty is advised. Indeed, women going to Mecca on the Hajj pilgrimage are prevented from wearing the face veil.

The wearing of the veil, despite owners' protests that it is a religious "obligation" , is a political statement, and nothing more. This week, the religious affairs minister in Egypt, Mohammad Hamdi Zaqzouq, said to ADN Kronos International that the nikab is not a religious object.

He said: "Nor is the niqab a duty deriving from the Sharia. I know I will be criticised for my words but I think some Muslims are committing a fundamental error, focusing on external and superficial aspects, without exploring more relevant themes, and hence providing a distorted image of Islam."

Posted by Giraldus Cambrensis at October 20, 2006 7:53 AM

Comments

Post a comment