Amongst heated discussions, can the Supreme Court confidently conclude that wearing the hijab is not integral to Islam?
While the Supreme Court ruled out the sovereign right to wear the hijab, they also asked “Will the right to dress also mean the right to undress?’ in the hijab case, a statement that shocked many seeming to be very insensitive in view of the circumstances that activated these laws.
The Supreme Court on hearing arguments by the lawyer for one of the petitioners challenging the Karnataka High Court verdict refused to lift the state government’s ban on hijab in educational institutions of the state.
A bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Ddulia had told Advocate Nizam Pasha, representing one of the Muslim petitioners not to draw parallels between the wearing hijab with members of the Sikh community wearing turbans.
While disagreeing with the Karnataka High Court (HC) ruling, Advocate Nizamuddin Pasha said that the hijab or headscarf protects Muslim girls. Anuncios Pasha argued that the finding of the Karnataka HC that the hijab is a cultural practice is based on the assumption, and to support his arguments, he cited various religious books. He also asserted that it was a misreading of the footnote that the state HC held that the hijab is a “recommendation” and not “essential”.
While comparing parallels between turban, kirpan, and hijab, Advocate Nizamuddin Pasha, who is also a student of Islam and Arabic drew similarities between the turban and kirpan with the hijab. Pasha argued that the headscarf is a part of the religious practice of Muslim women and asked if women can be contained from attending school wearing a hijab. He added that even Sikh students don turbans. He stressed that cultural practices should be protected.
Justice Gupta replied that comparison with Sikhs might not be appropriate as carrying the kirpan is recognized by the Indian Constitution. He remarked, “So don’t compare practices.” Gupta added that there are statutory requirements on turbans, all practices well established in the Indian culture. Later, Pasha refers to examples of foreign countries such as France, to which the court responded that we do not want to be following France or Austria. The court remarked, “We are Indians and want to be in India.”
Pasha highlighting the significance of the hijab said “When the Prophet is quoted as saying that your veil is worth the whole world and whatever is there in it and the Quran is saying that obey the God and obey the Apostle when you put the two together, there can be nothing more essential”.
Pasha went on to say “When a believing girl believes that her veil is better than the whole world and whatever in it, to face her with a chance of whether she wants education or veil is actually to tell her she is to be denied an education…”.
What Is the Hijab to Muslim Women?
Many Muslim women, when asked what the hijab means to them, have replied that besides its religious significance, say it represents their honor, dignity, modesty, their beliefs, and freedom of choice. A multitude of Muslim women expresses they feel something sacred, wonderful, and safe being adorned in a hijab.
One Muslim woman said, “The world’s most famous woman to ever wear the Hijab was Miriam in Arabic (Virgin Mary) the mother of Jesus (PBUH).”
By Denying Wearing the Hijab, Apex Court is Weakening Article 25: Firstly, to deny wearing the hijab to a Muslim woman is similar to denying her basic rights. The Constitution of India guarantees all its citizens six fundamental rights. These are the Right to Equality, the Right to Freedom, the Right against Exploitation, the Right to Freedom of Religion, Cultural and Educational Rights, and the Right to Constitutional Remedies. The Indian Constitution protects freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion.
The right to adequate clothing or the right to clothing is recognized as a human right in various international human rights instruments; this, together with the right to food and the right to housing, are parts of the right to an adequate standard of living as recognized under Article 11 The right to clothing is similarly recognized under Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
If a Muslim woman feels she would like to wear the hijab, that is her right, and if she feels she should not, that too is up to her. In the first instance, on speaking just about rights, as a Sikh feels it is their right to wear a turban, a Muslim may chalk out their right to wear a hijab, which is commonly worn in Muslim communities.
Secondly, Courts and Government are Only Focusing on the Hijab: While Rajasthani women wearing freely wear ghoonghats covering their faces, Muslim women wearing the hijab which is simply a head covering has become a major topic in India, making Muslims feel very uncomfortable. It is almost like the new laws are criminalizing the hijab, while no one has issues with Sikh turbans in educational institutions.
Thirdly, Hijab Controversy is Affecting Global Relationships: The sudden focus on the hijab has also lost trade and business with India and other Islamic countries. Crucially, it has also goaded global condemnation, drawing concern about whether the row could impact India’s relatively stable and friendly relations with its allied Islamic nations.
As the crisis deepens, the world’s eyes have turned to India in shock, with various international actors—such as the United States, Pakistan, Kuwait, Bangladesh, and Bahrain—and human rights groups and activists condemning India for the persecution of Muslims and “objectification”, “marginalization”, and “stigmatization” of Muslim girls and women.
In response to this outcry, a spokesperson for the ruling Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP), Smriti Hartis, told Al Jazeera: “The concept of uniform is to avoid discrimination between students. There is neither place for hijab nor saffron scarves in educational institutes.”
U.S. Ambassador-at-Large Rashad Hussain said, “Religious freedom includes the ability to choose one’s religious attire. The Indian state of Karnataka should not determine the permissibility of religious clothing. Hijab bans in schools violate religious freedom and stigmatize and marginalize women and girls.”
Fourthly, People in India and Around the Globe as Free Nations Dress Freely: In a free democratic nation, people dress according to preference and comfort. Whether the hijab is mandatory or not is not is not really the question but it is about the freedom of dress. Most conservative Christian women dress austerely, conceal their bodies, and cover their hair, and even short hair is considered inappropriate according to certain Bible verses they have picked out. This is their right and preference and they are not judged for it.
In direct contrast, some liberals dress skimpily and that too is their desire, and no one tampers with it. In America, while some Muslim Americans in educational institutes choose to wear the hijab, others do not. Could not these same wishes be respected in India?
Muslims have lived in India for centuries, unlike the West, but it seems strange that suddenly, the hijab is coming under attack and new laws are made restricting Muslim students to wear the hijab, and while other codes of dress are considered okay.
Fifthly, Religious Discrimination Causes Muslim Girls to Assert their Hijab Rights
The situation turned bad when even in ordinary zones, Muslims were being discriminated against “for the clothes they wore” and when their homes are being bulldozed due to their identity. During these times, the Supreme Court’s judgment on the hijab seemed biased and discriminatory. Muslims presently are feeling discriminated against due to the series of bashing events over the past few years that were first triggered since Mohammed Akhlaq’s gruesome lynching and it has not stopped since.
Due to religious bigotry against Muslims, the girls may be feeling attacked when the hijab is being taken off them and in the end, courts have to be sensitive to what they believe because they are saying, “Hijab is our right, Hijab is our pride!”