In 2011, my aunt Leila, who lives in Paris, was stopped by law enforcement because she was wearing a burqa, an outer garment worn to cover the entire body and face for religious and cultural reasons. She was fined 150 euros which is equivalent to about 205 U. S dollars, and such fines can be up to 200 euros. Leila was nearly arrested because she was resisting the force they were using against her to try to get her out of public by moving her to a more secluded location.
Many others have experienced situations similar to what my aunt has, and the public debate has been going on for years before and after the law went into effect, continuing to fuel fire on both sides. Ultimately, the debate struck in 2004 when the secularist country of France forbade students in state-run schools to display any form of religious symbols. The bans of religious affiliated garments, such as the veil, escalated from schools to now being in public settings.
The law was finalized in April 2011, “prohibiting the concealment of one’s face in public places” (Grand Chamber). Although the law was passed nationally for France and Belgium, other countries in Europe such as Italy are following the same route in banning the covering of faces in public. Many people still choose to wear it because they believe it is their human right to do so. However, some people believe the burqa is a threat to the country’s security and unified communities.
Generally people like my aunt Leila should have the right to make their own decisions about what they can wear in public regardless of their faith or culture, yet I understand the reasons behind why the law was passed by the European Court of Human Rights which includes national unity, security concerns and women rights. There are different views about whether or not the burqa ban is justifiable or detrimental to society.
For one, the French government claims the ban is not directed towards Muslim women but rather anyone who covers his or her face when it isn’t needed. For example, it is also against the law for someone to wear a helmet when not on a motorcycle. Those against the ban believe that claim is used as an excuse to specifically target Muslim women because of the fear of Islam, otherwise known as Islamophobia. While others make the claim that the ban is not to directly target Muslim women but rather allows for the communities in France to all fit in as one people.
Those against the ban also believe that people have the right to practice their religion and culture in public. They argue that restrictions shouldn’t be made based on what a group of people believe is associated instantaneously with Muslims. Those who wear the burqa feel degraded in their communities because of the way they are perceived by their clothing. “Many in the French Muslim community believe that there is a high possibility that the ban will lead to an increase of discrimination towards Muslims” (Dean 1440).
Essentially, one law will lead to another causing further restrictions towards other practices or symbols. In addition, some French Muslim women whom wear the veil believe the ban will cause the communities of France to be even less unified than what the French government intends to fix with the ban. This is because some French Muslim women believe they will feel forced to remain in their homes since they cannot go out without their veils and are also afraid for their safety if they go out into public with it.
Also, those against the ban argue that the idea of preserving the nationality of France by banning the burqa is seen as an excuse by many people in the Muslim communities because differences in religion and culture cannot be controlled or contained to some extent. On the other hand, according to the French Immigration Minister Eric Besson, stated that he wanted “the wearing of the full veil to be systematically considered as proof of insufficient integration into French society, creating an obstacle to creating (French) nationality” (96).
Some people that support the banning of the burqa agree with Besson’s reasoning that the face veil is unbeneficial to the French society. Another factor some people argue is that the burqa does not fit France’s traditional values and separates the women of France. Former French President, Nicolas Sarkozy began campaigning for a stricter law on religious expression in 2009. He argued that, “such a law is necessary to uphold France’s values and secular ways viewing the burqa as a sign of subservience rather than an expression of religious beliefs” (Sarkozy 96).
Many people agree with the former French president that the burqa is a symbol of oppression rather than the expression of religion. What Sarkozy views the face veil to represent is a factor to why he and many others who support the ban do not want to see the burqa on French soil. People should be able to express their religion and culture, however security has been a huge issue lately. To prohibit the covering of your face it can make it easier to identify the potential suspect and notice suspicions that can occur if they are not covered completely under the burqa.
Safety is a top basic need for all humans hence if people feel like they are in danger because of a religion or culture that some people may not understand that can easily result into a new law being made to ban such things. A problem that some people against the ban have [that is a contributing factor) is the excessive trust others have in the media without looking at both sides of the story or checking the story for reliability. This results of misconceptions that all Muslims are likely to be in suspicion of terrorist activity because of what is broadcasted through the media.
Those who are against the ban feel that media fuels the fire in the way they portray terrorists to be all or majority of Muslims. Essentially, countries in Europe such as France fear for their safety resulting to push for the creation of restrictions with human and religious rights. “As France is home to the largest Muslim population in Western Europe – 3. 5 million, representing six percent of the population and making Islam the second most practiced faith in France” (Britton 123). Through stereotypes and misconceptions, France particularly has the most fear because they have the largest population of Muslims in Europe.
According to The Huffington Post, some opponents even invoke feminism to defend the ban. International League for Women’s Rights president Annie Sugier, in a letter to the European Court, argues, “The full-face veil, by literally burying the body and the face, constitutes a true deletion of the woman as an individual in public”. Those who wear burqas reject these statements by explicating that the burqa itself gives them identities because it is a part of their beliefs and what they stand for as individuals in their communities.
The former president argues that the burga devalues women and their identity is deprived once they cover themselves to what is believed to many Muslim women as appropriate. Muslim women like Aminah Delago, a women who wears the face veil, counters Sarkozy’s argument about the burqa being a problem of women’s dignity and social norms. Principally, there are different views on what the burqa really represents but it all comes down to one’s interpretation on the matter.
There are different views on whether or not the burqa is detrimental to society or if the ban is justifiable. The French government justifies the ban by claiming it promotes gender equality, protects national security, preserves French ideals of maintaining a secular society, and promotes a unified French culture. On the other hand, those who do not support the ban of the burqa reject the explanations made by the French government. They instead argue that the ban violates human rights and is proposed to intentionally hurt the Muslim communities in France.
The question still stands whether or not the burqa ban has benefited France or caused more conflict and controversy over the past 5 years? While the ban stands for positive notions such as gender equality, it degrades the value of free will. Should the European Court of Human Rights be allowed to rule what people can wear for their religion and culture? This controversy needs more research and discussion to determine whether or not this ban has impacted more or less the way it was thought to be.
