On the 15th of September 2013, in Blackfriars Crown Court, Judge Peter Murphy had to decide whether to allow a woman to wear the niqab during a trial. In a balancing act, he ruled that she could wear her veil but would have to remove it if she gave evidence. In an attempt to make her feel more comfortable, he decided her face could be shielded from the general public. When she first entered the court room, the judge had no way of indentifying her as the correct defendant, and a female police officer was asked to confirm her identity in private.
It is a situation which brings into conflict different perspectives. From this woman’s perspective, the removal of her veil which would mean exposing her face to a number of people, including men, would be ‘unholy’, and would be contrary to all her beliefs. Religious freedom is something the UK has continued to uphold, contrary to countries such as France, where signs of religious belief have been banned in schools, courts of law and other public places. If banning is on the cards, as it may be, what should the underlying reasons for the ban be based on? Are we talking about a necessity, in order to make justice clearer and certain? Or does the ban hold within it a desire to control a situation that some feel ‘uneasy’ about it?
So why may the veil be a barrier to justice? Let us imagine the situation where a person is on trial for a crime. If a woman is called to give witness evidence wearing a niqab or a burqa, the juror will not be able to see her physical reaction to questioning or her general demeanour. For many, this is said to constitute a fundamental aspect of conducting a fair trial. This begs the question of whether by allowing veils in court; we are not compromising the outcome for those convicted of crimes. By giving right to religious freedom, are we not detracting from the right to a fair trial?
The issue has led to a wider debate about whether an outright ban is the right thing and politicians such as Jeremy Browne and Sarah Wollaston have questioned the issue. Whilst many believe niqab’s to be ‘offensive’ and degrading to women, this may be irrelevant in the sense that it is their choice. On the other hand, some have argued that a ban would be desirable for those coerced into the wearing of a veil, and that where freedom of expression is not genuine but imposed, a ban would be beneficial.
Veils have had more negative publicity after the terror suspect Mohammed Ahmed Mohamed dressed in a burqa in order to escape surveillance. Although Theresa May stated that every woman should decide how she wished to dress, once the issue becomes a security problem, many are likely to push for more restrictions. It seems that an ongoing debate is definitely on the cards.
Photo credits: bbc; telegraph