Karnataka hijab row: AIMPLB, Islamic clerics’ body move Supreme Court
New Delhi, March 28
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) andSamastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama—an Islamic clerics’ body—have moved the Supreme Court challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict upholding the ban on hijab in educational institutions in the state.
Some Muslim girl students have already challenged the Karnataka High Court’s March 15 verdict upholding the ban on wearing hijab in educational institutions in the state on the ground that it’s not an essential religious practice of Islam and school uniforms promoted harmony and spirit of common brotherhood.
Now, terming it a case of “direct discrimination against Muslim girls”, AIMPLB has said too much emphasis on bringing “uniformity” in the uniform without accommodating a person of one religion ‘to cover her hair with a piece of cloth’ is a travesty of justice as the judgment ignored the doctrine of reasonable accommodation.
“It is respectfully submitted that covering head and neck of woman in the presence of male outside her immediate family is the express dictum of Qur’anic verses and includes in teachings of Muhammed, the Messenger of God and supreme leader of Muslim community. Muslim women across the globe follow this practice in obedience of Qur’anic dictum and teachings of Muhammed ever since the period of Muhammed,” Samastha Kerala Jem-iyyathul Ulama submitted.
The Supreme Court had on March 24 refused urgent hearing on petitions challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict upholding the ban on hijab in educational institutions in the state.
“This has nothing to do with exams. Don’t sensationalise the issue,” a Bench led by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana had told senior advocate Devadatt Kamat after he mentioned the matter for urgent listing on the ground that examinations were going on.
A Full Bench of Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Justice Krishna S Dixit and Justice Jaibunnisa M Khazi had said, “Those not wearing hijab do not become the sinners under Islam.”
“Prescription of school dress code to the exclusion of hijab, bhagwa, or any other apparel symbolic of religion can be a step forward in the direction of emancipation and more particularly, to the access to education. It hardly needs to be stated that this does not rob off the autonomy of women or their right to education inasmuch as they can wear any apparel of their choice outside the classroom,” the HC said.
Holding that absolutely no case was made out for indulgence, it rejected the petitions filed by some Muslim girls challenging ban on wearing hijab in educational institutions in Karnataka.
“We are of the considered opinion that the prescription of school uniform is only a reasonable restriction (on fundamental right to freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a)) constitutionally permissible which the students cannot object to.”
“There is a lot of scope for the argument that insistence on wearing of purdah, veil, or headgear in any community may hinder the process of emancipation of woman in general and Muslim woman in particular. That militates against our constitutional spirit of equal opportunity of public participation and positive secularism,” it had said.
Noting that the “object of prescribing uniform will be defeated if there is non-uniformity in the matter of uniforms,” the high court had said, “School uniforms promote harmony and spirit of common brotherhood transcending religious or sectional diversities.”
