Council of Europe Unanimously Supports Right To Wear Burqa

[شمله ور خراساني]

Council of Europe Unanimously Supports Right To Wear Burqa Thursday, 24 June 2010 05:00 Anti-Islamic politicians and right-wing tabloids are frothing with rage after Europe's leading Human Rights body unanimously declared that banning the Burqa is unacceptable. The Council of Europe stated that outlawing religious veils would deny women “who genuinely and freely desire to do so” the right to cover their faces.

The Council is the parent body of the European Court of Human Rights, which enforces the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, any member state of the Council – which represents 47 European countries – that tried to ban the Burqa (religious face veil) could find itself subject to expensive lawsuits brought by victims of such laws. The news will affect Burqa-banning attempts by Belgium, France, Spain and the Netherlands

UKIP leader, and anti-Islamic politician, Lord Pearson said: “This vote just highlights the disconnection between the appointed politicians of the Council of Europe and the peoples of Europe. They refused to represent the people’s wishes, preferring to hold them in contempt.”

However Junaid Bhatti, Chief Editor of MuslimPolitics.com, welcomed the news, saying: "This is a great victory for those who believe in immutable rights for individuals. Clearly right-wingers across Europe, on the street and in the Parliaments, will be very upset as they rather enjoy demonising and persecuting minorities. I welcome this declaration. It sends a clear message that legislative attempts to remove the rights of minority groups are immoral and unacceptable. As for Lord Pearson, he seems to think that human rights should only be applied as long as they are popular. That is an incredibly foolish outlook and I would expect better from a Parliamentarian.”

Prior to the Council of Europe’s declaration, Belgium was expected to become the first European nation to ban the Burqa. The country’s Lower House of Parliament voted unanimously for a ban on wearing “clothing that hides the face” in a public place. However, the law will not come into effect unless agreed by the Upper House of Belgium’s Parliament.

The Council of Europe has also slammed the Swiss ban on the construction of Islamic minarets following last year’s a nationwide referendum. Right-wing politicians claimed the minarets represented militant Islam, and their campaign increased public animosity towards the 400,000 Muslims – approx 5%of the population – living in Switzerland.

Both resolutions were approved by MPs from 47 European nations including a British delegation. The Council ruled a general ban on face veils would impede the rights of women. “There should be no general prohibition on wearing the burqa and the niqab or other religious clothing,” the Council said.

However, the Council also stated that a woman should not be “compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family” as that would also constitute a criminal denial of human rights.

The Council did state that there could be limited situations where the banning of face veils could be justified such as “for security purposes or where the public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality, or that their face can be seen”.

The Council’s ruling was part of a report on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia that was approved in Strasbourg yesterday. The group also called on European governments to educate Muslims, their families and communities on their human rights and to encourage them to take part in “public and professional life”.

Now made up of 47 nations, and founded by Sir Winston Churchill in 1950, the Council of Europe is the continent’s human rights watchdog and oversees the European Court of Human Rights.


Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article and in the responses shown below are those of their individual authors. Articles and responses are not moderated prior to publication, but may be edited or deleted at the sole discretion of the MuslimPolitics.com Editors. We welcome the expression of political, philosophical and religious ideas even when we, the Editors, disagree with them. However, we do NOT welcome libellous, racist, vulgar or hateful dialogue directed towards any particular person or group of people. Swearing, pornography, spam, inappropriate links, off-topic postings and the advertising of goods and services are unwelcome and subject to Editorial sanction. Please report inappropriate articles or responses by utilising the "report" button or by email This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

[afghan]

Council of Europe Unanimously Supports Right To Wear Burqa Thursday, 24 June 2010 05:00 Anti-Islamic politicians and right-wing tabloids are frothing with rage after Europe's leading Human Rights body unanimously declared that banning the Burqa is unacceptable. The Council of Europe stated that outlawing religious veils would deny women “who genuinely and freely desire to do so” the right to cover their faces.

The Council is the parent body of the European Court of Human Rights, which enforces the European Convention on Human Rights. Therefore, any member state of the Council – which represents 47 European countries – that tried to ban the Burqa (religious face veil) could find itself subject to expensive lawsuits brought by victims of such laws. The news will affect Burqa-banning attempts by Belgium, France, Spain and the Netherlands

UKIP leader, and anti-Islamic politician, Lord Pearson said: “This vote just highlights the disconnection between the appointed politicians of the Council of Europe and the peoples of Europe. They refused to represent the people’s wishes, preferring to hold them in contempt.”

However Junaid Bhatti, Chief Editor of MuslimPolitics.com, welcomed the news, saying: "This is a great victory for those who believe in immutable rights for individuals. Clearly right-wingers across Europe, on the street and in the Parliaments, will be very upset as they rather enjoy demonising and persecuting minorities. I welcome this declaration. It sends a clear message that legislative attempts to remove the rights of minority groups are immoral and unacceptable. As for Lord Pearson, he seems to think that human rights should only be applied as long as they are popular. That is an incredibly foolish outlook and I would expect better from a Parliamentarian.”

Prior to the Council of Europe’s declaration, Belgium was expected to become the first European nation to ban the Burqa. The country’s Lower House of Parliament voted unanimously for a ban on wearing “clothing that hides the face” in a public place. However, the law will not come into effect unless agreed by the Upper House of Belgium’s Parliament.

The Council of Europe has also slammed the Swiss ban on the construction of Islamic minarets following last year’s a nationwide referendum. Right-wing politicians claimed the minarets represented militant Islam, and their campaign increased public animosity towards the 400,000 Muslims – approx 5%of the population – living in Switzerland.

Both resolutions were approved by MPs from 47 European nations including a British delegation. The Council ruled a general ban on face veils would impede the rights of women. “There should be no general prohibition on wearing the burqa and the niqab or other religious clothing,” the Council said.

However, the Council also stated that a woman should not be “compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family” as that would also constitute a criminal denial of human rights.

The Council did state that there could be limited situations where the banning of face veils could be justified such as “for security purposes or where the public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality, or that their face can be seen”.

The Council’s ruling was part of a report on Islam, Islamism and Islamophobia that was approved in Strasbourg yesterday. The group also called on European governments to educate Muslims, their families and communities on their human rights and to encourage them to take part in “public and professional life”.

Now made up of 47 nations, and founded by Sir Winston Churchill in 1950, the Council of Europe is the continent’s human rights watchdog and oversees the European Court of Human Rights.


Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this article and in the responses shown below are those of their individual authors. Articles and responses are not moderated prior to publication, but may be edited or deleted at the sole discretion of the MuslimPolitics.com Editors. We welcome the expression of political, philosophical and religious ideas even when we, the Editors, disagree with them. However, we do NOT welcome libellous, racist, vulgar or hateful dialogue directed towards any particular person or group of people. Swearing, pornography, spam, inappropriate links, off-topic postings and the advertising of goods and services are unwelcome and subject to Editorial sanction. Please report inappropriate articles or responses by utilising the "report" button or by email This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

what if it was disapproved? do you think so all your arab brothers and sisters will be able to leave the luxurious life in europe and go back to their home countries?

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

It's Europe, after all. In most cases, they can't restrict you from wearing anything. In France, the rule states that you can't show your religion in public institutions so no crosses, burkhas, etc. It's the same in Turkey. Perhaps the only problem with the burkha is that it can cause security concerns. Anyone can hide anything under it. Apart from that, I suppose whoever wants to wear it can do so in most cases anyway. Even though it's a horrendous way to dress.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

What do you mean?

Burkhas come across as walking tents, a blast from the Medieval past. Imagine a person who hasn't seen someone in a burkha before. What would his reaction be if he is approached by a person who barely has her eyes revealed?

It's also a crime to make a woman wear that when it's 40C outside. But in some societies, women are expected to wear them so they don't really have a choice.

[Levanaye Zalmaye]

So how do you expect people to dress in conservative society?

Conservativeness is relative....

I found this piece really interesting though:

Now made up of 47 nations, and founded by Sir Winston Churchill in 1950, the Council of Europe is the continent’s human rights watchdog and oversees the European Court of Human Rights.

Churchill was the guy that called for the gassing of the Kurds of northern Iraq. He was a pure, old-fashioned colonialist at heart.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

I guess the Kuffur have bowed down and allowed this non sense piece of clothing.

Oh well, If a women wants to cover her whole self then its her decision but in a western society it doesnt look normal.

Same with the case with the Punjabi Pakistani women who worked in a childrens school and even covered her hands and whole face. Children couldnt even see her.

Kind Regards

[tor_khan]

Burkhas come across as walking tents, a blast from the Medieval past. Imagine a person who hasn't seen someone in a burkha before. What would his reaction be if he is approached by a person who barely has her eyes revealed?

It's also a crime to make a woman wear that when it's 40C outside. But in some societies, women are expected to wear them so they don't really have a choice.

Imagine coming across a Bush Man from the Kalahary and one of his wives - they'd be wearning next to nothing, short of a few feathers and maybe some animal skin and face paint.

Imagine coming across an Eskimo Man wearning seal skins - he probably has as much of his body covered as a Muslim woman.

Imagine coming across a Hindu Woman in a 9-yard sari - she might even choose to drape some part of this over her head.

Imagine an Arab Man in a kandura and a ghutra.

Imagine a Pashtoon in his worn-out kameez partug.

Point is, people have their cultural ways of dressing - in our little corners of the world we develop rather narrow perspectives, and the Bushman, the Eskimo, the Hindu and the Arab would look strange to us if we have not come across them.

But just because some people may not have come across a Burkah before, doesn't automatically make it wrong. Burkahs which here is understood to mean the full mantle (and not the face mask - which in fact in Arabia is what burkah means), is just a different way of dressing. It's outer wear, like a coat and Arab women don't exactly wear them when they meet a private social gatherings and around the house.

In the due course of time, dress changes, is modified and altered. Every Muslim society has experimented with this. Modern Abayas are stylised and shift big money in terms of middle-eastern fashion (which, rather like shalwar kameezes or two piece suits for men has not deviate much from a common design template).

As for Burkahs being a crime - consider that Burkahs emerged in the desert where temperatures go way over 40C I can tell you, but that's not the point, and in fact barely inconvenience women who are used to A/C, marble flooring and modern living, so if it's a going to be referred to as being crime to wear them because of the heat, then know that the real crime is in places like Pakistan where people still can't control internal temperatures because there is no electricity to run the A/Cs.

[Toramana]

Point is, people have their cultural ways of dressing - in our little corners of the world we develop rather narrow perspectives, and the Bushman, the Eskimo, the Hindu and the Arab would look strange to us if we have not come across them.

But just because some people may not have come across a Burkah before, doesn't automatically make it wrong. Burkahs which here is understood to mean the full mantle (and not the face mask - which in fact in Arabia is what burkah means), is just a different way of dressing. It's outer wear, like a coat and Arab women don't exactly wear them when they meet a private social gatherings and around the house.

I will call this a pathetic argument. Not all things in a culture are based on fair play. Traditional cultures employ practices aimed at discrimination based on gender, creed, ethnic affiliation, etc. They limit the freedom of one section of society whereas empowers another section.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

I dont see how a burqa has a place in Pashtun culture. Nobody ever heard of a Burqa until after the Soviet War. Plus Iam sure there no mention of a burqa in the Quran.

Kind Regards

[tor_khan]

I will call this a pathetic argument. Not all things in a culture are based on fair play. Traditional cultures employ practices aimed at discrimination based on gender, creed, ethnic affiliation, etc. They limit the freedom of one section of society whereas empowers another section.

Actually, it's not a pathetic argument. Even if we choose to disagree on the validity of the burkah - most people who value freedom would agree that the right of equality underscores human rights within which our individuality also needs to be respected. Within that framework, if we broadly defend the right of someone to not wear a certain type of clothing then provided a burkah does not harm another person, we should also be prepared to defend the right to wear it.

Frankly, I'm almost completey indifferent and believe that wearing a burkah is about choice, but that's not the point in the way you frame your retort.

You make a value judgement on "traditional" cultures - as if "culture" were always frozen in one mode - and in doing so your own lack of understanding of this and personal cultural chauvanism is obvious.

[Toramana]

tor_khan, let me disect what you wrote in the earlier post.

Implicit in your comment was the argument that there is cultural motivation behind the use of burkah in Europe. This is absolutely wrong. The motivation on the contrary is religious one rooted in the self-rightuous belief that who wear burkah are morally superior to who don't. People holding such view are potentially very dangerous and highly vulnerable to religious intolerance and authoritarianism. In fact, the Muslims in non-Muslim countries advocating burkah become some of the worst enemies of traditional cultures e.g., Pashtun dress, baby names, salutations, etc. are despised and deemed un-Isamic by these "pious" Muslims.

As for the cultural transformation, the evident trend is, those who settle in the West/other countries as normal Muslims soon fall prey to extremism/fundamentalism thanks the influence of Islamic despotism. They start hating other Muslims and non-Muslims for their impiety. They also become homophobiac/misanthropic and withdrawn from the rest of the society into their inner community. This can be called reverse cultural transformation and not the kind of cultural change you are talking about.

A practice e.g., dress code, based on religion becomes crystalized in time contrary to what you claim. To sum it up, if it were due to culture, it would have been open to change and also tolerant to cultural practices of other people but alas it isn't because the basic motivation doesn't come from culture.

As for respecting individual freedom, once you go out in public domain, what you do no longer remains individual choice. However, I agree there is no harm excercising individual faith within the bounds of home. Then there is a universal concept of individual freedom i.e., your freedom should not limit the freedom of others. For example, baring people from using certain places because they are used by Muslim females is limiting the freedom of others.

[tor_khan]

tor_khan, let me disect what you wrote in the earlier post.

Implicit in your comment was the argument that there is cultural motivation behind the use of burkah in Europe. This is absolutely wrong. The motivation on the contrary is religious one rooted in the self-rightuous belief that who wear burkah are morally superior to who don't. People holding such view are potentially very dangerous and highly vulnerable to religious intolerance and authoritarianism. In fact, the Muslims in non-Muslim countries advocating burkah become some of the worst enemies of traditional cultures e.g., Pashtun dress, baby names, salutations, etc. are despised and deemed un-Isamic by these "pious" Muslims.

I see some misconceptions here:

1. Pashtoon dress is unIslamic, right - is this what you are implying?

2. Names like Gul Pana may not be traditional Arabic names, but I've yet to come across a non-Pashtoon Muslim who is offended by that name.

3. Salutations in Pashto are also unIslamic - well then I'd better watch out because, I'm the worse culprit. If I'm not careful and I say Da Allah Pa Amaan, it's quite possible some skin-head Muslims on the streets of London are going to attack me for not using some Arabic expression.

Toramana - you're being alarmist and hysteric.

As for the cultural transformation, the evident trend is, those who settle in the West/other countries as normal Muslims soon fall prey to extremism/fundamentalism thanks the influence of Islamic despotism. They start hating other Muslims and non-Muslims for their impiety. They also become homophobiac/misanthropic and withdrawn from the rest of the society into their inner community. This can be called reverse cultural transformation and not the kind of cultural change you are talking about.

I am sorry that European Muslims are forced into ghettos. I really am. This contrasts widely with 'new world' Muslims who are found in larger numbers in the provinces and suburbs where they like barbeque lifestyles and blend into the communities around them.

I've lived in both Europe and North America and it is evident that religious and cultural ghettos in Europe is not a new phenomena - Hugenots, Calvanists, Jews, Muslims have all been forced to look inwards at various points. This in fact says more about European society, because the same insular attitudes do not form in the same way across the Atlantic, where unlike France and Belgium and the UK etc., the veil is a personal issue and not headline news in your daily press. Similarly, the reason that the UK Muslims are vulnerable to radicalism, is something that the UK society needs to ask itself.

As for respecting individual freedom, once you go out in public domain, what you do no longer remains individual choice. However, I agree there is no harm excercising individual faith within the bounds of home. Then there is a universal concept of individual freedom i.e., your freedom should not limit the freedom of others. For example, baring people from using certain places because they are used by Muslim females is limiting the freedom of others.

Examples please.

They haven't started religous or gender segregation on public transport, so I can't think where Muslim women in Europe have priveleges over the common downtrodden second place citizens.

Toramana - you have fallen hook, line and sinker for the nonsense peddled by the ex-colonial powers. The truth is, whilst western values continue to change, new values are attached to eastern customs - clearly you subscribe to some this nonsense.

Today, values have changed, we talk about supposed security threats - the burkahs/veils, call them what you like are seen as regressive and non-integrationist, but glance back into history and the reasons cited for trying to disetablish the veil - in the past Orientalists in Muslim lands spent years trying to get behind the veil, not because it was a security threat or because they wanted to liberate women, but because they found it erotic.

[star]

I don't believe in the burqa.
Just another man made idea.

[tor_khan]

I don't believe in the burqa.
Just another man made idea.

Man being the operative word. No surprise there I guess. The fashion/cosmetics industry, like all the others is controlled by men. Burkahs or no burkahs, many of the choices we believe we have already been decided for us by men in grey suits.

[Toramana]

I see some misconceptions here:

1. Pashtoon dress is unIslamic, right - is this what you are implying?

2. Names like Gul Pana may not be traditional Arabic names, but I've yet to come across a non-Pashtoon Muslim who is offended by that name.

3. Salutations in Pashto are also unIslamic - well then I'd better watch out because, I'm the worse culprit. If I'm not careful and I say Da Allah Pa Amaan, it's quite possible some skin-head Muslims on the streets of London are going to attack me for not using some Arabic expression.

My point was, Traditional cultures with basis in human pragmatism are open to change/transformation but the inpspiration for burkah and other orthodox Muslim practices, in non-Muslim countries especially, unfortunately comes from Islamic belief not culture. Such practices seldom change because of the immutability of the belief itself.

As for Pashtun names, salutations (pa khair raghlai, starai ma shai, kha charai), etc., my point was, those with religious conviction are extremly averse to using traditional Pashtun names, salutations, etc. I have met many Muslims in the West who call Pashtun names and salutations un-Islamic and insist that they be replaced with Islamic/Arab names. Similarly, Pashtun veil (paronai) is not approved by orthodox/conservative Muslims.

Toramana - you're being alarmist and hysteric.

I, in response, can blame you for trivilising the motives for and negative implications of burkah. I can say that your advocacy of burkah stems from religious ego and reactionary feelings rather than objective thinking.

I am sorry that European Muslims are forced into ghettos. I really am. This contrasts widely with 'new world' Muslims who are found in larger numbers in the provinces and suburbs where they like barbeque lifestyles and blend into the communities around them....

Similarly, the reason that the UK Muslims are vulnerable to radicalism, is something that the UK society needs to ask itself.

Why are Muslims specifically forced into ghetoes? Why isn't any other community e.g., Hindus, Sikhs, etc. making hue and cry about this? Isn't it a fact that Muslims have a very poor track record of integration into host societies or showing some respect for values of the societies where they live?