India School Hijab Ban: Majority of Hindu Women Also Cover Their Heads

[FuturePAF]

Has the Indian court also ordered Sikh Boys to remove their head coverings.

Avertissement de redirection

I hope Lawyers for the students look to legal precedents set overseas, as Indians tend to respect judgements made in western courts.

In The United States District Court

www.justice.gov

Religious expression is seen in Indian schools but it does not look to be impeding the education of the children. It is not a “secular” environment, it seems students are free to be who they are and practice as they see fit. Why the big push to change what has worked, unless this is an ideological push from the top to suppress one group.

citytoday.news

This domain may be for sale!

citytoday.news

Rakhi Making Competition – The Hyderabad Public School

hpsbegumpet.org.in

 

[waz]

Just see respond from Muslim world

My brother no one will say anything. What is the reaction in Indonesia regarding this out of curiosity?

 

[MultaniGuy]

So much for India claiming to be a secular country.

 

[Indos]

My brother no one will say anything. What is the reaction in Indonesia regarding this out of curiosity?

Well, for general population they shows resentment over Indian treatment on Muslim students. We can see clearly on the comment section.

456.000 viewers

894 comments

155.000 viewers

981 comments

Half milion viewers

181.000 viewers

85.000 viewer
980 comments

Other related matter in December 2021

Almost 1 million

OIC has condemn India, so it is not right to say no Muslim nations responding. This has become a conversation between Muslim nation foreign ministers before this statement is released

India Kecam Pernyataan OKI Soal Larangan Hijab |Republika Online

India memandang OKI melakukan propaganda jahat terkiat larangan hijab

www.republika.co.id

 

[Indos]

OIC Expresses Deep Concern over Continued Attacks on Muslims in India​

Date: 14/02/2022

The General Secretariat of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) expresses deep concern over recent public calls for genocide of Muslims by the ‘Hindutva’ proponents in Haridwar in the State of Uttarakhand and reported incidents of harassment of Muslim women on social media sites as well as banning of Muslim girl students from wearing hijab in the State of Karnataka.

The continued attacks targeting Muslims and their places of worship, the recent trend of anti-Muslim legislations in different States and rising incidents of violence against Muslims on flimsy pretexts by ‘Hindutva’ groups with impunity, are indicative of the growing trend of Islamophobia.

The OIC General Secretariat calls upon the international community, especially the UN mechanisms and Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, to take necessary measures in this regard.

The OIC General Secretariat further urges once again India to ensure the safety, security and wellbeing of the Muslim community while protecting the way of life of its members and to bring the instigators and perpetrators of acts of violence and hate crimes against them to justice.

Other Press​

• Egypt and OIC General Secretariat co-organized a side event on “Women's Economic Empowerment in OIC Member States”, on the side-line of the 66th Session of the CSW
• OIC Secretary-General Praises the United Nations on the Adoption of March 15 as International Day to Combat Islamophobia
• Secretary-General Receives the Permanent Representative of Kazakhstan to the OIC
• Saudi Arabia in Cooperation with OIC, IsDB and WDO Co-organized Side Event on Capacity Building for Female Refugees, on the Side-line of the 66th Session of the CSW
• Secretary-General Receives Special Envoy of China to Middle East
• On the Commemoration Day of the 15 March 2019 Terrorist Attack in New Zealand: OIC Secretary-General Reiterates Calls for International Solidarity against Islamophobia
• Commemorating 3rd anniversary of Christchurch Terrorist Attacks Statement by the OIC Group in Geneva
• OIC Condemns Crimes of Field Execution of Palestinians
• OIC Signs Cooperation Framework Agreement with the Republic of Turkey for Provision of Scholarships
• OIC Holds 48th Session of Council of Foreign Ministers in Islamabad

https://www.oic-oci.org/topic/?t_id=30849&t_ref=19650&lan=en

 

[waz]

Well, for general population they shows resentment over Indian treatment on Muslim students. We can see clearly on the comment section.

456.000 viewers

894 comments

155.000 viewers

981 comments

Half milion viewers

181.000 viewers

85.000 viewer
980 comments

Other related matter in December 2021

Almost 1 million

OIC has condemn India, so it is not right to say no Muslim nations responding. This has become a conversation between Muslim nation foreign ministers before this statement is released

India Kecam Pernyataan OKI Soal Larangan Hijab |Republika Online

India memandang OKI melakukan propaganda jahat terkiat larangan hijab

www.republika.co.id

Thanks bro they often look up to Indonesia. These actions just isolate them further.

 

[Indos]

'Communal Mindset': India Slams OIC for Statement on Hijab Row, Muslims in India

India condemned the "misleading" comments made by OIC on the ongoing hijab row in Karnataka. The MEA Official Spokesperson and Joint Secretary Arindam Bagchi stated that OIC has continued their flagitious disinformation against India.

www.thequint.com

 

[Joe Shearer]

Another view: an interesting one because the commentary distinguishes between constitutional law and administrative law. In whatever has transpired in this forum, it is largely constitutional law that has been discussed.

Puzzling To Say Hijab Is Inconsistent With Freedom : Professor Farrah Ahmed On Karnataka High Court's Judgment

It is very puzzling to hold that wearing of hijab is inconsistent with freedom, said Ms.Farrah Ahmed, Professor in Melbourne Law School, Australia, while speaking at an online discussion on the...

www.livelaw.in

Puzzling To Say Hijab Is Inconsistent With Freedom : Professor Farrah Ahmed On Karnataka High Court's Judgment Mehal Jain 18 March 2022 2:42 PM SHARE

 

[Joe Shearer]

They should do this

Your post smacks of retaliation. Are you sure you are discussing the use of a turban on merit?

 

[WotTen]

Perhaps this whole debate has been framed incorrectly and we need to go back to basics.

My view is that schools (and governments) should do everything possible to encourage students to attend school, especially females and especially from underprivileged communities. Certainly in the West, schools bend over backwards to accomodate all kinds of special needs.

This is easier in countries like the US, where (public) schools don't have uniforms, but in countries where schools require uniforms and some item of clothing is deemed noncompliant, we need to step back and ask a more fundamental question, i.e. what is the purpose of a school uniform and can that purpose be achieved while also allowing individual freedoms.

As I see it, a school uniform serves several purposes.
1. Build a sense of community.
2. Inculcate conformity.
3. Mitigate socioeconomic differences.

So the question becomes, is a strict uniform the only way to achieve these objectives, or can they be accomplished by relaxing the dress code but mandating an item of clothing with school insignia?

A blind adherence to tradition -- just because -- is not a vlid excuse to curtail individual freedoms.

P.S. Whether the choice of clothing is based on religion is irrelevant.

 

[M. Sarmad]

Since the question of hijab being a part of essential religious practice was the bone of contention, the high court said, it was necessary to decide if wearing of hijab was made mandatory under Islam.

State interpreting divine texts for its subjects and making them into laws is the first step on the downward spiral towards theocracy.

 

[Joe Shearer]

State interpreting divine texts for its subjects and making them into laws is the first step on the downward spiral towards theocracy.

Sir, Let me remind you, the issue before the court was not to convert a state direction into the law of the land, for there was not even such a state direction; the court's job was to apply the test of essential practice of religion, and arrive at a conclusion whether the state could authorise institutions to stipulate a dress code.

The state was kept at arm's length; there is, in fact, no possibility of either a State such as the State of Karnataka, or the Union of India restricting an essential practice mandated by any religion, except in the interest of public order, morality or hygiene, and it was understood and accepted by all concerned (see below) that these exceptions did not apply. Regarding the acceptance that no exceptional circumstances prevailed, you may find a free acceptance of this by an officer of the court, the State's Attorney General, who went so far as to deprecate some words in his own government's Government Order regarding the authority of institutions to set dress codes, and the bench agreed that those words might be treated as rescinded.

It is not the state, but the courts of law that have the authority under the Indian constitution to examine religious matters and to adjudicate on them. In a nation ruled by a constitution, clearly the constitution must be supreme.

My view is that schools (and governments) should do everything possible to encourage students to attend school, especially females and especially from underprivileged communities. Certainly in the West, schools bend over backwards to accomodate all kinds of special needs.

Yes, that is a commonly held view, and one of the objections to the ruling has been that everything should be done by the educational system not merely to encourage students to attend school, but to encourage diversity. Talking of bending over backwards, it was in Tamil Nadu that the practice of giving school children free meals began, based on the thinking that this would be an incentive for the dirt-poor parents of most school children to send their child to school at least for the sake of a filling meal.

in countries where schools require uniforms

Before going further, let us remind ourselves that one of the purposes of a uniform is to prevent disparities between the social situation of different students becoming an obstacle to their intermingling or to their sense of equality.

Mitigate socioeconomic differences.

Precisely. It is not to deny that the other reasons you have cited are also important.

 

[Joe Shearer]

So the question becomes, is a strict uniform the only way to achieve these objectives, or can they be accomplished by relaxing the dress code but mandating an item of clothing with school insignia?

Perhaps it is.

As it happens, the state in question left it to the institutions - schools and colleges - to define the uniform. It might well have taken the form that you have mentioned; that it did not speaks of the reluctance of the different administrative committees to think progressively. For now.

A blind adherence to tradition -- just because -- is not a vlid excuse to curtail individual freedoms.

In some cases, the dress code was a new concept.

 

[Joe Shearer]

.S. Whether the choice of clothing is based on religion is irrelevant.

No doubt about that.

One is compelled to point out that this discussion has been deliberately led astray by some earlier posters.

There was no universal ban on the hijab. There was not even a universal ban on the hijab for school children or for students of 'junior' colleges. There was no ban by the state government.

The state government had issued a government order, after the first few instances of hijab wearing had attracted public and media, and political attention, saying that defined administrative bodies in institutions could put out a dress code.

The court was asked to compel these administrative bodies to allow the use of a hijab.

The court ruled that not wearing the hijab did not constitute an essential practice of the religion, and therefore would not come under the protection of the constitution to the extent that college and school dress codes would have to accommodate it.

 

[WotTen]

The state government had issued a government order [...] that defined administrative bodies in institutions could put out a dress code.

Indeed, that brings me back to the point about first principles. The issue at hand is not whether hijab is a constitutionally protected practice, but whether imposition of a school dress code is.

This begs two questions, which I listed above:
1. What is the (constitutionally valid) purpose of a school dress code?
2. Can a school achieve that purpose without imposing a strict dress code? In particular, as I mentioned, can an item of clothing over a hijab serve the same purpose?

If the answer to #2 is 'yes', then the imposition of a strict dress code is an unnecessary violation of individual freedoms. Ironically, the anti-hijab activists claim that Muslim women are forced to wear the hijab, and here they are dictating what these women should wear instead.

I think the EU human rights court (or some such) ruled that employers could require workers to take off the hijab but, in that case, the court decided the business had a legitimate right to maintain a certain look. I don't know if such an argument would apply to schools.