Belgium: constitutional court refuses to suspend veil ban law

Belgium’s highest court on Wednesday refused to suspend a law banning the wearing of burqas, but said it was still examining whether the recently-adopted act is legal.

The Constitutional Court ruled that there was no evidence that the two women who have appealed against the law have suffered serious discrimination, the Belga news agency reported – leaving no ground to suspend it.

The measure came into force in July, making Belgium the second in Europe after France to criminalize the burqa, which completely covers women’s bodies, as well as other types of Islamic veils.

Anyone caught in public places with their face completely or partially covered – thus preventing identification – is liable to a fine of up to 137 euros (182 dollars) and up to seven days’ imprisonment.

DPA, 6 October 2011

Lisa Valentine wins settlement: Douglasville courthouse screenings will now be adapted to accommodate religious head coverings

Lisa_ValentineDOUGLASVILLE, Ga. — A Muslim woman who was arrested in 2008 after refusing to remove her hijab in a Douglasville courtroom has received a settlement from the city.

The settlement includes changes to the way people wearing religious head coverings are screened when they enter the courthouse, according to Azadeh Shahshahani with the American Civil Liberties Union of Georgia.

Lisa Valentine spent several hours in jail in December 2008 after declining to take off her hijab while accompanying her nephew to a traffic hearing in Douglasville Municipal Court. She sued the city in December 2010, saying her free speech rights were violated when she was asked to remove the head covering.

“We are glad that the city of Douglasville has acknowledged that the way that Ms. Valentine was treated was inexcusable and awful,” Shahshahani said. “No one should feel singled out in a court of law simply for observing her faith.”

According to Thursday’s settlement, Douglasville has adopted a special policy that allows people wearing religious head coverings to be screened in a private area by an officer of the same gender.

“I am glad that Douglasville has agreed to formal policies to make sure this never happens to anyone else,” Valentine said after her settlement hearing.

WXIA-TV, 6 October 2011

See also ACLU press release, 6 October 2011

US Supreme Court clears way for Muslim woman to sue over headscarf removal

The Supreme Court will let a Muslim woman sue Southern California jailers for making her take off her head scarf in a courthouse holding cell.

The court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from Orange County, Calif., officials, who were sued in 2007 by Souhair Khatib.

Khatib had gone to the Orange County Superior Court to ask for more time to complete her community service. But a judge ordered her jailed, and jailers forced Khatib to remove her head scarf.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected arguments that holding cells aren’t covered by a federal law protecting the religious practices of prisoners. They also ruled Khatib had the right to wear the scarf unless jailers could show it was a security risk.

Associated Press, 3 October 2011

Muslim woman had veil ripped from her face

A woman admitted ripping the head veil off a devout Muslim woman in Halifax. Jacqueline Zaro, of East Street, Sowerby Bridge, pleaded guilty on the first day of her trial to intent to cause religiously-aggravated harassment, alarm or distress in the incident on June 11 at King Cross Road, Halifax.

James Weekes, prosecuting, told Calderdale Magistrates’ Court the victim had moved to this country six years ago and was a devout Muslim who wore the veil to cover her face. He said the victim said she has had sleepless nights since and now feels vulnerable and too afraid to go out shopping on her own.

The court heard Zaro told police she had drunk three litres of cider beforehand and when she was shown CCTV footage she accepted she had pulled off the headscarf.

Magistrates gave Zaro a 12-month community order with supervision and six months’ with an alcohol treatment team. They also ordered her to pay £100 prosecution costs and £100 compensation to the victim.

Halifax Courier, 3 October 2011

Express website carries call for murder of Muslims

Sometimes the most obnoxious aspect of the coverage of Islamic issues by right-wing newspapers is the sickening online comments their articles provoke. Two days ago the Express published a short report on the Swiss parliamentary vote in favour of banning the veil. The one comment it has so far attracted openly calls for Muslims to be killed. Despite the comment being reported, the admins at the Express website evidently have no interest in removing it.

Express comment on Swiss veil ban

Swiss MPs back SVP motion banning veil

SVP racist posterSwiss MPs have approved a far-right move to impose a ban on the burqa or other face coverings in some public places, including on public transport.

With 101 votes against 77, the lower chamber of the house approved the motion, which was titled “masks off!”, on Wednesday. The draft bill will still have to be examined by the upper chamber.

Continue reading

Muslim mother is abused by schoolchildren

Tracy ShahA mum who converted to Islam says she is being subjected to abuse each day as she walks her children home from school by pupils who jeer at her from a passing bus.

Tracy Shah, 31, of Shipley, who wears a headscarf, claims she has been spat and sworn at since February by a group of pupils travelling on a bus from St Bede’s Catholic Grammar School, which passes her on Canal Road and Gaisby Lane.

Orange juice has been thrown over her two-year-old daughter, water has been thrown at them from bus windows and verbal abuse hurled, Mrs Shah claims.

The mother-of-three who converted to Islam in 2003 before marrying her husband, said: “They have sworn at me and shouted out of the windows at me “why are you wearing a towel on your head?”

Telegraph & Argus, 26 September 2011

EEOC sues Albuquerque hotel over ban on employee wearing hijab

MCM Elegante Hotel704 HTL Operating, LLC and Investment Corporation of America, doing business as MCM Elegante Hotel in Albuquerque, violated federal law by subjecting a Muslim woman to religious discrimination and to retaliation for opposing the discrimination, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it filed on September 21, 2011.

In its suit, the EEOC said that the hotel failed to accommodate Safia Abdullah’s request to work wearing a hijab, a head scarf worn by Muslim women for religious purposes. In addition, the EEOC alleges that the hotel either failed to hire Abdullah or discharged her because of her religion and/or because she engaged in the protected conduct of opposing discrimination, including requesting religious accommodation.

Such alleged conduct violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits employment discrimination based on religion and retaliation for opposition to discrimination. The EEOC filed suit in U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico (EEOC v. 704 HTL Operating, LLC and Investment Corporation of America Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00845) after first attempting to reach a voluntary settlement through its conciliation process.

“We will vigorously prosecute cases of religious discrimination throughout our district, including claims that involve the employer’s refusal to provide reasonable accommodation for an individual’s religious beliefs,” said Regional Attorney Mary Jo O’Neill of the EEOC’s Phoenix District Office, which has jurisdiction over Arizona, Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah. “We are particularly concerned when the accommodation requested is easy to provide and the employer appears to have reacted to myths or stereotypes about a religion.”

EEOC press release, 22 September 2011

French court issues first fine over niqab ban

A French police court on Thursday issued its first fines against two women charged with wearing the full-face covering Islamic niqab.

Police have issued several on-the-spot fines since the ban came into effect in April but these are the first court-issued fines, with the women vowing to appeal their case all the way to the European Court of Human Rights.

Hind Ahmas, 32, was ordered to pay a 120-euro fine, while Najate Nait Ali, 36, was fined 80 euros. The court did not order them to take a citizenship course, as had been requested by the prosecutor.

The two women arrived too late to attend the court’s deliberations. One of the women had not been allowed into the court in May because she refused to take off her niqab to show her face.

Yann Gre from the Don’t Touch My Constitution association that is defending the two women who were arrested in May in front of the town hall of Meaux, around 50 kilometres (30 miles) east of Paris, said that they would appeal. If the fines are confirmed by a higher court, they will take their case to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, he said. “This law forbids women in niqab from leaving their homes and going out in public. It’s a kind of life-sentence to prison,” he said.

Continue reading

France’s burqa ban: women are ‘effectively under house arrest’

An informed article by Angelique Chrisafis on how the veil ban is playing out in France. So far no judge has handed out a fine, and the law will be challenged in the European Court of Human Rights as soon as a fine is imposed. Meanwhile, the ban has led to a rise in physical asaults on women wearing the niqab.

Guardian, 20 September 2011