THE case of a female defendant who refused to remove a full face veil in court prompted much debate when it was reported last year.
Judge Peter Murphy upheld a ruling allowing Muslim woman Rebekah Dawson to stand trial wearing a veil making only her eyes visible. But the 22-year-old waived her right to give evidence in her defence after it was ruled that she would have to remove the niqab if she took the stand, allowing the jury to see her face while she gave evidence.
She later admitted witness intimidation, after denying the charge during a seven-day trial.
Now the UK’s most senior judge says that judges must show respect to women who choose to keep their faces covered due to their religious beliefs.
In a speech entitled ‘Fairness in the courts: the best we can do’, Lord Neuberger said judges must have “an understanding of different cultural and social habits”, in their bid to show fairness to those involved in trials.
Addressing the Criminal Justice Alliance, the Supreme Court president said: “It is necessary to have some understanding as to how people from different cultural, social, religious or other backgrounds think and behave and how they expect others to behave.
“Well known examples include how some religions consider it inappropriate to take the oath, how some people consider it rude to look other people in the eye, how some women find it inappropriate to appear in public with their face uncovered, and how some people deem it inappropriate to confront others or to be confronted – for instance with an outright denial.”
Ratna Lachman, director of JUST West Yorkshire, which promotes racial justice, civil liberties and human rights, welcomed Lord Neuberger’s comments.
“As a civil liberties organisation we welcome a measured and culturally sensitive approach that affords freedom of expression of religion and belief to all,” she said. “Lord Neuberger’s comments should be supported as they recognise that on occasions there maybe a bias due to lack of awareness and assumption made about race, ethnicity and faith, and this needs to be guarded against.
“It also offers a much needed balance at a time when there is a rising anti-Muslim sentiment and Islamophobia. It has to be seen as a positive measure that will enable people from all backgrounds to participate and be treated equally by the judicial system, particularly at a time when the principle of fair access to justice is critical against a background of legal aid cuts.”
Next month the Bradford-based Muslim Women’s Council (MWC) is holding a conference focusing on Islamic extremism, its media portrayal and the impact on Muslims in the district. The Daughters of Eve conference will also highlight women’s concerns about being stigmatised because of their dress code.
One member of the MWC told the Telegraph & Argus she believes that wearing a headscarf led to her being targeted by other parents at her child’s school, in a predominantly white village, with one parent even filming her walking to her car.
“I’m convinced it’s because I wear a hijab,” she said. “The hijab is something very personal, even down to the design on the scarf. It shouldn’t be a political thing but it has become that.”
Bana Gora, MWC chief executive, said: “More women wear the hijab now, which is largely down to personal choice and solidarity, but the dress code is very visual and attracts negative attention. This has worsened in recent years, with wider global events such as Syria.”
Mandeep Kaur of Shipley wears a hijab but chooses not to cover her face. “It comes down to personal choice,” she said. “Of course religious beliefs should be respected in places like a courtroom, but I can appreciate why some people would be frustrated at the idea of a woman giving evidence with her face covered.
“In western culture there is a lot of emphasis on facial expressions, and how they show various emotions. If I was giving evidence in court I would expect the jury to see my face, I can see why that is important.
“But I think the judge is right to tell judges and lawyers to take into consideration what is appropriate and inappropriate for people from different religious, cultural and social backgrounds.
“I would say most judges are white, public school-educated men, and a lot of lawyers are too, and they need to be respectful of cultural differences.
“This is the 21st century and we live in a diverse community in the UK. The court process should reflect that.”
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article