No Compulsion in Hijab 02

Assalaamu alaikum [Peace be to you],

Previous part of this article can be found here:



Like the woman should not be forced to wear the Hijab, the one who decides to wear it should not be forced to remove it.

In recent decades, some European Countries have imposed restrictions on Islamic dress for Muslim women. Some European Countries passed special laws on banning the use of the Hijab in schools. As a result, many rights and freedoms of the Muslim women and girls are infringed.
Let us ask, Do such legislations violate human rights and fundamental freedoms of the Muslim minorities?


B- WHAT DO HUMAN RIGHTS SAY:

Protecting minority rights has been reflected in several Human Rights Instruments. In other words, these documents protect the rights of all people including minorities, without any distinction as to religion, race etc … and especially guarantee everyone the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as the freedom to manifest his or her religion or belief in practice and observance.

The prohibition of religious discrimination is reflected in article 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. This article states that “everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status”. Article 18 of the Declaration states that "everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion... "


Some arguments behind the anti‐Hijab legislations:
Those states who have adopted regulations or policies against the right of the religious minorities to wear Hijab, justify their policies based on three premises:
1) Islamic dress is considered as a symbol and religious sign, and not as practicing a religious duty;
2) Islamic dress can be disruptive to the way of health and safety of the community,
3) Hijab has negative impacts on others especially in schools and it exerts religious pressure on fellow students.


In response to the above mentioned arguments, the following counter arguments should be born in mind:

First of all and based on the teachings of Islam, observing Islamic dress is considered as one of the main tasks and religious duties and not just a religious sign and symbol. One of the Islamic duties for women is to observe the Islamic dress. Therefore the Hijab ban is a real barrier to perform a religious duty which denies the right of Muslim women to practice and observe their religion.

Secondly there is no acceptable justification proving Islamic dress as a risk for public safety, order, health, and morals or in conflict with the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. The best evidence proving this comment is that the European Court of Human Rights, in none of the cases claimed around Hijab issue, has explained how the Islamic dress is in conflict with public order. On the contrary, some judges at the same judicial systems believed that it is not correct to consider everyone who uses the Islamic dress is fanatic and has a religious missionary.

Thirdly under international law, states can only limit religious practices when there is a compelling public safety reason, when the manifestation of religious beliefs would impinge on the rights of others. However, it has not been shown that ‘the right to be free from religious pressure’ has indeed been infringed. Muslim headscarves do not pose a threat to public health, order or morals; they have no effect on the fundamental rights and freedoms of other students; and they do not undermine a school’s educational function. In other words, it has not been shown in what way the Hijab would have such influence on fellow students. International human rights law obliges state authorities to avoid coercion in matters of religious freedom, and this obligation must be taken into account when devising school dress codes.

The flipside of this argument is that religious students have the right to be protected from secular pressure. The pressure exerted by the institutionalized educational system, the teachers and fellow students is surely greater than the pressure by some Muslim girls wearing Hijab .


Some negative effects and consequences of adoption of laws prohibiting Hijab
Various Regulations adopted in some countries to ban Hijab including banning religious signs or dress which are generally justified by the principle of secularism not only violate right to freedom of religion but also has other negative consequences on the enjoyment of other human rights such as the right to education, work, etc. For example, the most negative consequences of "French legislation on banning religious symbols in schools" Focuses on Muslim girls and women, and this violates the principle of non‐discrimination and equality in educational opportunities. This decision will deny girl access to schooling. Child should have to choose between practicing the tenets of their faith and acquiring a basic education. This presents one way before Muslim families: expelling Muslim girls from public educational system in France, and this is a clear violation of the right to education.


Principle of non‐discrimination and equality, the right to religious freedom and right to practice and profess religion give support to religious minorities who wish to perform religious duties. Banning on Hijab IS a violation of human rights and religious freedom and has no legal logic.

^{from [link]}


I hope this was beneficial for you all.


if I am right, it's from the God. if I am wrong, it's from myself.