/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Muslim veil 'allowed in courts'



Uthman
04-25-2007, 07:02 PM
Muslim veil 'allowed in courts'

Muslim women will be allowed to wear a veil in court under new guidelines issued following a dispute last year.

The Judicial Studies Board's Equal Treatment Advisory Committee examined whether women should be allowed to wear the full facial covering, the niqab.

Decisions should be made on each case and veils should not interfere with the administration of justice, it found.

It follows the adjournment of a case in Stoke-on-Trent, Staffs, after a legal advisor refused to remove her veil.

Judge George Glossop said he was having difficulty hearing legal executive Shabnam Mughal at the immigration court in November.

We respect the right to wear the niqab as part of religious beliefs, although the interests of justice remain paramount


Mrs Justice Cox, Committee chairwoman

The guidelines say forcing a woman to choose between her religious identity and taking part in a court case could have a "significant impact on that woman's sense of dignity" and could serve to "exclude and marginalise" her.
Committee chairwoman Mrs Justice Cox said: "We respect the right for Muslim women to choose to wear the niqab as part of their religious beliefs, although the interests of justice remain paramount."

She said a judge may consider taking action to allow a fair hearing for women wearing a niqab and others in proceedings.

The guidelines say if the wearer is a victim it should not be "automatically assumed" that the niqab would create a problem.

"Nor should it ever be assumed without good reason that it is inappropriate for a woman to give evidence in court wearing the full veil."

It is heartening to see the courts base their guidelines on the merits rather than on intolerance and prejudice


Massoud Shadjareh, Chairman, Islamic Human Rights Commission

Any request to remove a veil should be considered carefully and be "thoughtful and sensitive" and the courtroom could be cleared of those not involved in the case for her proceed.

Judges should assume female Muslim lawyers are entitled to wear the veil, the guidelines say.

A judge may consider excusing a juror if a challenge is made by one of the parties, providing the objection is genuine.

The Islamic Human Rights Commission said it welcomed the guidelines.
Chairman Massoud Shadjareh, said: "In the climate of Islamophobia we live in, it is heartening to see the courts base their guidelines on the merits rather than on intolerance and prejudice."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...re/6588157.stm
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
04-26-2007, 01:29 AM
Thats good :thumbs_up
Reply

Khan-Ghalgha
04-26-2007, 01:35 AM
What country is that? muslim one or not?
Reply

Al_Imaan
04-26-2007, 01:52 AM
cool....i think its in england...
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Uthman
04-26-2007, 03:38 PM
:sl:

Yeah, it's in England. In fact, it seems just to be restricted to Staffordshire because the link follows there.

:w:
Reply

Pygoscelis
04-27-2007, 07:49 AM
I strongly believe that no special favour should be given on religious grounds. That being said, I see no reason why covering ones face while in a court room shuld be a problem, unless you are giving testamony.

Wherever you can wear a veil I should be allowed to wear a ski mask.

format_quote Originally Posted by Muezzin
Why stop there? Why not take away copies of the Torah, the Quran, the Guru Granth Sahib and the Hindu Scriptures whose name escapes me, so that people of those faiths can't swear an oath on them?
Why do that? There is no special favour given by allowing them to swear an oath on their holy books. They each can do so on their own book, and atheists can affirm. There isn't any special favour involved.

Religious tolerance is very important in the court room.
Religious tolerance and special favour to religion are two very different things.

Judges usually make a lot of sense, but I'm biased since I'm studying law.
Judges often make no sense at all. I'm also biased, since I practice law.
Reply

Muezzin
04-27-2007, 10:00 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
I strongly believe that no special favour should be given on religious grounds
Why stop there? Why not take away copies of the Torah, the Quran, the Guru Granth Sahib and the Hindu Scriptures whose name escapes me, so that people of those faiths can't swear an oath on them? England, after all, is a Christian country, and if you can't swear on the Bible, you can't be trusted, and I don't care what your religion is, I don't make concessions! :p

Religious tolerance is very important in the court room. Judges usually make a lot of sense, but I'm biased since I'm studying law. Either way, nobody here really has any control over the decision. Ha.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 02-23-2010, 04:22 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-27-2010, 06:47 PM
  3. Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12-26-2006, 12:23 AM
  4. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-15-2006, 01:24 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!