Court Calls for More Guidance on Religious Dress Rights in Schools

On Wednesday 2nd March, the British Court of Appeal sided with a 16-year-old schoolgirl that had been barred from wearing a full Islamic dress by her school. The court ruled that the teenage student's human rights were violated under the European Convention on Human Rights, according to the Associated Press.

Shabina Begum was sent home from Denbigh High School in Luton, north of London, in September 2002 for wearing the jilbab - the most traditional Islamic dress with a long flowing gown covering all of her body except her hands and face. The Court said that she had been sent home from school unlawfully.

Denbigh is an interfaith school without any religious background. According to Associated Press, four-fifths of Denbigh's 1,000 pupils are Muslim. Pupils are allowed to wear trousers, skirts or a traditional shalwar kameez, consisting of trousers and a tunic, and female pupils may wear head scarves.

The school's ban on Begum from wearing her jilbab last year carried the reason that she might cause divisions among pupils, because wearing traditional dress could be seen as trying to make herself a "better Muslim" than others.

However, Begum told Associated Press after the ruling that the school's decision was "a consequence of an atmosphere that has been created in Western societies post 9/11, an atmosphere in which Islam has been made a target for vilification in the name of the ‘war on terror’."

The UK government, which was put on full alert by the terrorist attack, has tried to harmonise interfaith relationships by reinforcing the Religious Hatred Bill. The bill aims to ban any actions or speech made by far-right groups and extremists from all religions which could be considered as stirring up hatred against the followers of other faiths.

The success of Begum in restoring her rights to wear religious dress has shown the government’s efforts in protecting basic human rights unbiased of a particular religion.

Begum’s was quoted by the Associated Press as saying, "It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."

Begum, who was represented by Cherie Booth, wife of Prime Minister Tony Blair, called Wednesday's judgment "a victory for all Muslims who wish to preserve their identity and values despite prejudice and bigotry."

In fact, due to rising tensions between different faiths all around the world, many see that the religious rights in Europe have been more restricted by governments, especially after cases of banning religious symbols and dresses in a handful of European countries.

Nearly a year ago, on 4th March 2004, the French government adopted a ban on all "conspicuous religious symbols" including Islamic head scarves, Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses from state schools by an overwhelming vote.

In Britain, a different view has been taken, allowing individual schools to decide what forms of dress are appropriate.

A spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) said to the BBC, "Our school uniform guidance states that governors should bear in mind their responsibilities under sex and race discrimination legislation and the Human Rights Act, be sensitive to pupils' cultural and religious needs and differences and give high priority to cost considerations."

The DfES guidelines say schools must be "sensitive to the needs of different cultures, races and religions and accommodate those needs within their general uniform policy. For example, allowing Muslim girls to wear appropriate dress and Sikh boys to wear traditional headdress."

In addition, the DfES "does not consider that exclusion from school would normally be appropriate where a pupil fails to comply with the school's rules on uniform".

In the wake of Begum’s case, the court called on the DfES to give schools more guidance on how to meet their obligations under the Human Rights Act.