In a rather unexpected judicial ruling, the European Court of Justice has proposed a ban on headscarves, worn by Muslim women. Though none of the member countries has responded to the judicial order so far, it is expected to fuel yet another Islamophobic discourse across Europe.
By Asad Mirza
NEW DELHI—The wearing of the Hijab has divided Europe for years and the issue came before the courts again in Belgium after an employee of the eastern municipality of Ans in Denmark was told she could not wear one while at work.
Lawyers for the woman, who performs her duties as head of the office primarily at the backend services, argued that her right to freedom of religion had been infringed.
Court’s Ruling
The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) said authorities in member states had a margin of discretion in designing the neutrality of public service they intended to promote.
However, this objective must be pursued in a “consistent and systematic manner” and measures must be limited to what is strictly necessary. It was for a national court to verify that these requirements were complied with.
The CJEU ruled for the first time on women’s wearing of the headscarf in 2017, when the Luxembourg court found that the garments could be banned, but only as part of a general policy barring all religious and political symbols.
The judgment also stipulated that customers could simply not demand that workers remove headscarves if the company they were working for had no policy barring religious symbols.
A press statement issued by the CJEU stated that on 28th November, the Court of Justice, sitting in the Grand Chamber, delivered its judgment in OP v Commune d’Ans (C-148/22), concerning a request for a preliminary ruling from the tribunal du travail de Liège (Labour Court, Liège, Belgium) dealing with a prohibition on wearing religious signs in the workplace which was imposed not by a private employer but by a public employer, in this case a municipal authority.
In its ruling, the Court specifically underscores that it is the responsibility of national courts to verify whether these requirements are adhered to.
However, as a result of this ruling, government offices across the EU can ban employees from wearing religious symbols, such as Islamic headscarves, in the interest of neutrality.
However, the court said that bans on clothing or symbols linked to philosophical or religious beliefs had to be applied evenly. “Such a rule is not discriminatory if it is applied in a general and indiscriminate manner to all of that administration’s staff and is limited to what is strictly necessary,” it said in its ruling.
These symbols included the wearing of earrings with a cross or the holding of Christmas parties, the complainant’s lawyer told the Guardian. The court turned to the EU, asking the Court of Justice to assess whether the neutrality rule was discriminatory.
Impact of the new ruling
The new court ruling will definitely open a Pandora’s box across Europe, further fuelling Islamophobia, due to various associated reasons.
Firstly, the court has explicitly covered all religions in its ruling and forbids any religious sign, like earrings or necklaces with a cross being worn by any person. Yet, based on past experiences one can foresee that both the public and the governments will overlook this and focus their energies and reactions on headscarves only.
Secondly, this ruling may once again fuel a debate on the Hijab or veil, though both clothing are completely different. But the narrative, which was set during the earlier veil controversy in the UK in 2006, may once again be used disproportionately and illogically. The issue of hijab has been a divisive matter across Europe in past years.
Right-wing politicians across Europe welcomed the then long-awaited judgment, whose consequences were felt in elections in the Netherlands and France. This comes in the backdrop of increasing right-wing nationalism in various European countries like Belgium, France, Germany and most recently the Netherlands, where a well-known Islamophobe Greet Wilders might become the new Dutch PM.
Critics have described the bans as attacks on religious freedoms that predominantly affect women. Human Rights Watch, the NGO, said bans on religious clothing and symbols for teachers and other civil servants in Germany led some Muslim women to give up teaching careers.
The ban on face coverings in France, meanwhile, led to fines for nearly 600 Muslim women in less than three years, and France’s 2004 law banning the wearing of headscarves in schools kept some Muslim girls from finishing school.
In the UK there are no bans on headscarves or other religious symbols. In France, which hosts one of largest Muslim communities in the EU, laws designed to adhere to the country’s basic principle of secularism known as “laicite”, ban Muslim women from wearing hijab.
French Sports Minister Amelie Oudea-Castera said in September that French athletes were required to abide by the country’s principles of secularism, thus banning female athletes from wearing hijab during the 2024 Paris Olympics.
However, a UN human rights official, while talking to reporters on 26th September pointed out that hijab is a harmless practice in normal circumstances, and banning wearing a headscarf for religious reasons infringes on one’s right to freedom of faith.
The UN official further explained that “specific circumstances” meant conditions “that address legitimate concerns of public safety, public order, or public health or morals in a necessary and proportionate fashion”.
Nevertheless, the main worry remains that this latest court ruling may give rise to increased Islamophobia, particularly on social media. The right-wing elements both in and outside India may soon launch an offensive campaign against Islam and Muslims, just like the one that they are spearheading at the moment against Palestine.
(Asad Mirza is a Delhi-based senior political and international affairs commentator.)
Very informative ۔۔۔
Very informative ۔۔