Human Rights on Banning Veils in France - Coursework Example

Human Rights on Banning Veils in France The advent of the security threats entailed in the new face of terrorism is leading various actors in particular countries to take firm stance and action in establishing the policy to guard against terror attacks. Terrorism and crime are becoming a universal and global threat to security and as such, the nations are taking all measures possible to assure the security of the citizens. Another aspect of terror in correlation is the association to Islam (Nigro, 2010). Notably in all virtual formulations and incidences of terror, the case leads back to the origin of perpetrators as being Islamic extremists. Hence, the association of terror to the Islamic religion is another aspect of concern in the wake of global security threats. Consequently, varied nations are taking in effect measures to manage the possibility of a terror attack. However, such measures and formulations are proving costly to the discourse of human rights and liberties particularly for the targeted group of people (Spohn, 2013). Such measures raising the constitutionality and legality of these measures is the recent institution of the law banning the use of veils in France. The debate then ensues on the commitment of the government of France in facilitating and respecting the rights of the Islamic religion and its conceptualized doctrines; hence, the course of this dissertation is to assess the reasons for the banning of the veil and the impact of the action in France from a critical approach. In understanding the undertakings of the case against the veil, it is significant to understand the description of the “veil” garment in contestation in the case of France as well as across the globe (Nigro, 2010). Notably, according to the Islamic description of the veil, it is simply a scarf covering that women wear on their heads. Similarly, the Jewish and additional Christian traditions also facilitate and allow for the wearing of such headscarf in the commitment to practice modesty and piety (Spohn, 2013). The subject of the veil in Islam, however, has a vast composition as there are different types of veils. For instance, there is the hijab that is an Arabic word meaning to cover. This garment is a headscarf that covers the head, ear and neck sections of the body, but not the face (Pei, 2013). Then there is the Niqab, which is a veil covering the entire head and face, leaving only the eyes space for the wearer to see (Pei, 2013). Then there is the Burqa, which is a veil covering the entire body, head, and face as well as the eyes section (Pei, 2013). This veil only leaves a mesh window in the eyes section for the wearer to see. These are the core forms of the veil established in Islamic view and as such, the course of the discourse that ended in the human rights courts. The Islamic women where the veil as for varied reasons, with the core reason being that it facilitates adherence and observance of their religious beliefs. In this effect, the women cite that the Koran calls for the people, both male and female to cover themselves in modest (Pei, 2013). Thus, as in any other religious cases, the scripture is subject to varied interpretations. The case in effect leads to the Islamic faith citing the same from the scripture in Koran to support their wearing of the veil. Similarly, in some Christian traditions particularly the Jewish doctrine, the women cover heads with the veil as a sign of piety and modesty (Spohn, 2013). Further, the women in Islam also cite that the veil helps in maintaining purity and sanctity of the body, as their modest dressing prevents the men from lusting after the women. Further, some men in Islam require their wives and girls to wear the veil to protect themselves from other men seeing them, which is a sign of possessiveness (Spohn, 2013). However, in all these formulations, the notable course established for wearing the veil is that it is in observance to the Koran which is the holy law and word from Allah. Observing the recent developments in the security sphere, the course to burn the use of the veil, notably the burka in France reflects the fears entailed among the people as they interact with the globalized world (Mullally, 2011). Notably, factors of immigration continue to facilitate the course for varied cultures and religions to interact accordingly (Mullally, 2011). Further, the Islamic religion is notably spreading remarkably particularly in Europe a factor that is raising concerns about the role of the security entities in protecting the people against terror. The stereotyping factors associating Islam to the course and support of terror and its activities is also another element in consideration in the course of understanding the origin of the measures against wearing the Islamic veils. In 2010, the French Parliament voted into law a ban against the wearing of the clothing that covers the face while in public places. Consequently, France became the first nation to enact a law against a custom that Muslims observe as a religious obligation. The bill, then called burqa bill also restricts against the wearing of niqabs and balaclavas or any other covering that covers the face of the person. The bill effected in 2011, however, does not forbid the use of the hijab or a headscarf (Pei, 2013). The Islamic law faced significant criticisms considering the implication it had on the customs and beliefs of the Muslims. Further, the Muslims felt it was an infringement of their human rights, hence the course undertaking the case to the human rights court. Consequently, the judges at the European court of human rights (ECHR) upheld the stance taken by France to ban the use of the burqa (Pei, 2013). The Islamic perspective of this law is that it undermines their religious beliefs and in effect reflects a violation of their liberties of worship (Spohn, 2013). The Islamic religion cites that indeed, the ban against some of its traditional customs bordering on dressing in modesty is in violation of their rights and freedoms of worship. Another conceptual reason that the Islamic fraternity take towards the ban is that France is acting in a manner that reflects their stereotyping issues (Mullally, 2011). Notably, the Muslims reflect that the ban is a course of generalization that possibly all the Muslims are agents of terror. Hence, the course to ban the wearing of the veils covering the face is a reflection of the effect of stereotypes against the Muslim community. The effect also reflects that Muslims ar feeling rather marginalized in France, as the French undertaking is in effect proving the belief that to ward off terror, Islam is a curse that the government and the law ought to cab accordingly. Further, the ban on wearing of the veil covering face also sparked an international uprising with varied nations now pursuing the course to ban the same. This is in effect leading to a heated confrontation in the international sphere as the vast Middle East region where Islam is widely practiced feel that the course is a fight against the entire Islamic fraternity. Notably, varied nations such which are predominantly Islamic express their dissatisfaction and disappointment in the course as France undertook to ban the wearing of the Islamic veils covering the face (Nigro, 2010). This could prove a course for international enmity as the conceptualization of such developments could reflect a larger distrust issues and intolerance among the people. For instance, in France, the ban in view of many people of the Islam faith is that the law targets the Muslims as victims of discrimination and abuse in the belief that they are suspects of terror attacks and insecurity. Thus, such observations from the perspective of the Muslims follow the course of the developments reflecting the recent ban of veils in France. However, the valuation of the law banning veils in France is far wide and reaching, considering that it is a general bill outlining the ban against veils as well as other face covering items such as masks in public (Powell, 2013). Thus, approaching the argument from this simplified perspective, the course then follows that France did not act in a course targeting the Muslim women, but rather acted in the course for the greater good of the French people. The move as the French government explains is a measure to facilitate the security entity in the country, following recent developments that depict the course that terrorism and crime are on the rise. The government from Paris presents the argument that indeed, the law seeks to unify and encourage the citizens to “live together” (Powell, 2013). The French government, in support of the law, reflect accordingly that it does not target the Islamic community but rather outlines the course for other coverings including helmets and hoods that cover the entire head and parts of the face of the individual while in public places. Further, the French government also reflects accordingly that security is of urgency and as such, the government has the obligation to factor and facilitate support for the security entities (Powell, 2013). Therefore, such formulations do not target the Islamic women but rather focus on establishing a peaceful coexistence among the populations in France. However, in the wake of the establishment of the law against covering of the face using veils or any other covering, the human rights watch groups out rightly declared that the law targeted the Islamic women. The human rights perspective argues that the establishment of a ban of this nature has a notable disproportionate impact on the targeted people (Powell, 2013). The impact is that it has a vast bearing on the Muslim women and thus, is deemed to be in violation of their rights which deter against discrimination on the basis of gender and religion. The Human Rights Watch content that the law breaches the freedoms of religion and expression for the people wearing the veil similar to niqab or burqa (Adrian, 2009). In so arguing, the affected represent their views on the ban. For instance, a Muslim woman protesting against the ban says that wearing the niqab veil is a personal choice, and it serves to facilitate her with inner peace with herself. Thus, the ban infringes on her right to privacy and freedom of conscience, religion, and expression. Another element in consideration is the revelation that the ban has a notable implication on the grounds of discrimination basing on sex religion and ethnic origin. The human rights perspective is that, in implementing the course for this law, the government is creating the channels for abuse and unfair treatment against the Muslim community as well as the people of such ethnic origin as Arabic speakers (Adrian, 2009). This is in the observation that enforcing the law in a fair manner is notably a challenge. Therefore, in these aspects, the ban does reflect a significant course impacting the rights of the individuals. Nonetheless, according to the European Court of Human rights, the ban is non-discriminatory (Powell, 2013). The court supports the stance that the ban did not target the Muslims but rather is a course for all conceptualizations of veil coverings on the face. In conclusion, the course in establishing the ban against the veil covering in France entailed establishing a sense of security and human correlation among the citizens. The French government is notably aware of the security challenges and as such, in implementing the ban, it minimizes possibilities of crime and terror in which perpetrators often cover their faces extensively with such veils. Additionally, the ban does not out rightly state that it targets the Muslim women, but rather it encounters all veil uses. Thus, the case is not seeking to infringe on the human rights of the Muslim women. Nonetheless, human rights Watch presenting their fears against the ban also have a substantial argument, considering that Islam and its traditions are freedoms outlined in the constitution. However, the stance of the government is evidently seeking the greater good of the country and French citizens. References Adrian, M. (2009). France, the Veil and Religious Freedom. Religion, State & Society, 37(4), 345-374. doi:10.1080/09637490903315385 Mullally, S. (2011). Civic Integration, Migrant Women and the Veil: at the Limits of Rights?. Modern Law Review,74(1), 27-56. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2230.2010.00835.x Nigro, R. (2010). The Margin of Appreciation Doctrine and the Case-Law of the European Court of Human Rights on the Islamic Veil. Human Rights Review, 11(4), 531-564. doi:10.1007/s12142-010-0161-z Pei, S. (2013). Unveiling Inequality: Burqa Bans and Nondiscrimination Jurisprudence at the European Court of Human Rights. Yale Law Journal, 122(4), 1089-1102. Powell, L. R. (2013). The Constitutionality of Frances Ban on The Burqa in Light of The European Conventions Arslan V. Turkey Decision On Religious Freedom. Wisconsin International Law Journal, 31(1), 118-146. Spohn, U. (2013). Sisters in Disagreement: The Dispute Among French Feminists About the “Burqa Ban” and the Causes of Their Disunity. Journal Of Human Rights, 12(2), 145- 164. doi:10.1080/14754835.2013.784661 Read More