In 2000, a Muslim girl named Shabina Begum enrolled in Denbigh High School in Luton, England. The school required students to wear uniforms, and the uniforms were developed in consideration of the fact that approximately 80% of the students at Denbigh were Muslim:
In devising a suitable uniform, the school went to immense trouble to accommodate the religious and cultural preferences of the pupils and their families. There was consultation with parents, students, staff and the Imams of the three local mosques. One version of the uniform was the shalwar kameez (or kameeze), a sleeveless smock-like dress with a square neckline, worn over a shirt, tie and loose trousers which taper at the ankles. [Link]
In accordance with her religious beliefs and consistent with the school’s uniform requirements, Shabina wore a salwar kameez, or “shalwar kameez” as noted above. She did so for the first two years of her time at Denbigh. However, she later determined that the salwar kameez would not be appropriate for her to wear.
Her brother Shuweb Rahman says that “as Shabina became older she took an increasing interest in her religion” and through her interest in religion “discovered that the shalwar kameez was not an acceptable form of dress for Muslim women in public places.” [In 2002, Shabina] turned up at school wearing a long shapeless black gown known as a jilbab. [Link]
The school’s response? The assistant head master told Shabina to “go home and change.” She went home and never came back.
Shabina sued, claiming that her freedom to manifest her religion was violated. Yesterday, five Law Lords unanimously disagreed, holding that
there was no interference with the respondent’s [i.e., Shabina’s] right to manifest her belief in practice or observance. [Link]
The Lords apparently reasoned, in part, that Shabina could have simply gone to another school nearby that had a more suitable uniform policy:
there were three schools in the area at which the wearing of the jilbab was permitted…. There is, however, no evidence to show that there was any real difficulty in her attending one or other of these schools…. [Link]
Apparently one of the justifications for refusing to permit the jilbab was health and safety. Tahir Alam of the Muslim Council of Britain had this to say:
One of the main reasons Denbigh did not allow the jilbab was health and safety, and you have to ask yourself how many people have fallen over and died because they tripped on their jilbab?…. It’s an excuse really. [Link]
Those disappointed in the result should note that the Lords stated, at the beginning the opinion, that the decision was limited to the facts of the individual case:
It is important to stress at the outset that this case concerns a particular pupil and a particular school in a particular place at a particular time. It must be resolved on facts which are now, for purposes of the appeal, agreed. The House is not, and could not be, invited to rule whether Islamic dress, or any feature of Islamic dress, should or should not be permitted in the schools of this country. That would be a most inappropriate question for the House in its judicial capacity, and it is not one which I shall seek to address. [Link]
If everything mentioned above is correct then I would have to agree with the ruling. She could have gone to another school and she appears to be making an excuse and/or looking for a fight. I actually commend the school in question in going to the great lengths to design their uniform to accomodate minority students in this way.
Is this a government school or a private school? And what about the other three which did allow jilbabs?
The school in question is public, don’t know about the neighboring schools.
I kinda agree with the ruling too. I do think that the school achieved a reasonable standard for its uniforms, and Shabina sounds like a serious outlier. Hell, I’ve never even seen Muslim girls in India wearing those things to school. At the most, a salwar kameez with a head cover.
guess i have to be the odd one out. i’m siding with the girl. i mean heck, the girl wants to be more modest, and follow her faith. she’s not dressed like this,!
that’s all i have to say….
What if a public school in the U.S. said that they’ve met with African-American families, provided excellent instruction to all students, appreciated black culture, etc., but it was segregated? And then a court says, we appreciate the efforts you’ve made towards African-Americans and in any case there is an integrated school down the street, so no illegality.
If some other school girl, after 2 years of attending school, decided to go in the opposite direction – ie, more Britney Spears than Brit schoolgirl, would the school board accept that? Probably not. So IMHO, the school was right in its decision. Maybe what’s missing in the whole saga is some kind of dialogue between the girl and school before she decided to change her attire.
pram, good point:
One has to agree that there has to be limitations. The school already has a liberal policy towards uniform, and British schools are notoriously strict about uniform. She could just find a school that accommodates her needs, laws can not change to accommodate the extremes of religion.
I went to a private school in Kenya and the religious muslim girls were allowed to wear head scarves and pyjama like pants but the rest had to be in compliance with the school’s uniform. They wore the jilbab after school hours. She sounds like trouble..
I definitely side with the ruling. As Msichana stated, in Kenya, girls wore pants and a headscarf in addition to the shirt and tie and skirt that was the uniform, both in public and private schools. In my school they were also excused from the mandatory swimming lessons (even though these were sex-segregated).
I think that she went in all defensive and millitant (she came prepared for battle as Dave points out) shows that she just seems to want to be contrary.
as all teens do at some point in their ‘difficult” years 😉
More than anything else I end up feeling bad for Shabina who, let’s keep in mind, was not even 14 years old at that time and who, it seems likely, was being used as a pawn in the ideological games of her elders.
Apparently her brother is a member of Hizbul Tahrir and since this took place after she lost both her parents, it seems likely that her brother was using her as a pawn for HuT agenda to stoke more ‘victimization’ fires amongst Muslims.
While I appreciate the comments about what people saw when they were growing up and this girls attitude/approach to this may not have been helpful; to me the issue here is whether or not she has the right to wear that particular clothing to a public school. The ruling obviously does not address this (and I’m not familiar with the British judicial system so I don’t know who is supposed to address it).
Does anyone know what the law or court precedent is around this in the UK? For the record, I believe she should have the right to wear the jilbab. I believe that one should be allowed to express his/her religious beliefs through clothing as long as it does not harm anyone else, infringe on anyones rights, violate community standards of decency, etc. So these caveats may rule out wearing immodest clothing, but I would not think that wearing a jilbab would be harmful to others or infringe on any rights, etc. And I think it’s ludicrous to say that this poses a health/safety risk. There are hundreds of millions of women wearing this type of clothing around the world; I have yet to hear of an epidemic of women tripping and hurting themselves due to their clothing.
the uniform is a debate in itself.
Pros
Cons
a dog’s breakfast.
not st mary’s i hope – i’ve heard they had some baaad indian girls there – compliance-shumpliance aside.
We’ve obviously been discussing this a lot over here. When I saw you post this in the news Dave I didn’t know what stance you’d take, so I’m glad you’ve put it up so that I can hear people’s views.
At Pickled Politics we’ve had a spate of threads about it and as you’ll see opinion is divided, but I, along with most people, am strongly in favour of this decision. There are a range of reasons as to why but sadly I’m a bit short on time now, perhaps Jay/Jai/Sunny will drop in and expound further.
This is not to be taken in the same breath as schools in France banning headscarves etc. Some feel it irrelevant, but I think it’s highly pertinent, that the headmistress at the time was Muslim and the uniform was drawn up with the local mosque and religious groups. Yes I entirely agree with some people here, she was being used as a pawn by Hizb ut Tahrir (‘Pizza HuT’ as coined by our own Jay Singh) who seek any opportunity to force their agenda on mainstream society. Although sometimes appearing a bit self-righteous, I too feel for Shabina Begum as she has been manipulated and missed out on two years of school.
Saints (as St Mary’s was known) was an all boys school, except for the IB classes…and even those had very few girls…they were probably bad. very bad 😉
I beg to differ. What we saw when we were growing up, informs our opinions now, and that is what we were stating. Not our offers to help the debate, simply our opinions on the matter at hand.
Adding to debate (now that my opinion has been stated), Dost, do you think uniforms should exist at all? Should they exist in public schools? or private schools only?
And let me ask you this, how cool would you think these same people would be if I walked into their Mosque (or for that matter a Temple/Gurudwara/Orthodox Church) dressed inappropriately (whatever that means in different contexts)?
Opinion: I’m very pro-uniform in school (upto, not including, college/uni), IMHO, it eliminates a lot of the competitive nonsense that most children can do without. And I believe in doing as the Romans when in Rome, or at the very least respecting those around me. So in my psycho-protestant school I bowed my head (did not necessarily pray) when prayers were conducted. I cover my head when entering a Gurudwara. And in school I wore a uniform. The way they were meant to be worn.
Oh and incidently do you also believe that she should also be allowed to join the army and wear the Jibab instead of the uniform?
This issue is already being debated exhaustively on Pickled Politics, so interested Mutineers can check out the various arguments and counter-arguments on the following PP threads:
Shabina Begum’s ruling means more segregation.
Shabina Begum loses jilbab case.
Not supportive of Shabina Begum.
on a lighter note, when I first came here I was quite mystified by the exotification (is this even a word?) of the Catholic School Girl outfit. Thinking to myself that it must have something to do with the idea of a bunch of horny school girls pining for male attention more than the clothes. I quite forgot about it.
Then I started dating a Catholic someone, and he kept going on about how hot it was that I’d gone to Catholic School and what not. So I promised him that when I went home, I’d bring one of my uniforms back.
Imagine his surprise when I came out wearing this(scroll to bottom SFW), instead of this(NSFW)!
Yes I am a FOB!
Lol. Don’t tell me you never hiked up the skirt! At least, that’s what happened in the catholic girls’ school I went to. Oh how we hated the Spanish teacher with the ruler.
craps.. you went to consolata!!! I looked just like that indian dude in that page… i went to kilimani and then to strathmore… that explains the link to saints I hope… 🙂
the rule was that when you knelt (Catholics and their kneeling) the skirt had to at LEAST touch the ground (not skim, touch….)
Dhaavak…Kwaani? Kirimani huh? and Strath? how old are you? I had a few friends at Strath
now you’re just being fresh 🙂 … old enough to know strath wasnt always a co-ed school.
aiiiye, usiseme hivyo.
ok, what yea did you clea KCPE?
i didnt.
it just used to be called CPE then.
and was a kid but i remember the coup well. enough clues for you 🙂
i can safely say i didnt go to school with any of your friends but drop me an email if you want to chat.
Hmmm – the coup was in 1982, and dhaavak remembers it, so he must have been at least 9, which would mean that he was born some time after 1975 so he’s at least 31 …
Muslims seem to want the world to conform to their every single need. They play the victim so well. The whole world is against poor defenseless muslims. How many Islamic countries would allow Hindus, Christians, or for that matter atheists to freely practice their religion? Their religion wants to impose its medieval beliefs on the rest of us. One day its cartoons they find offensive and the next its homosexuals and writers.
🙂 you dummass. did you have to spell it out. ok… i’m so embarassed i have to go run now…
where didjuall think i started running… august 1, 1982.
Not everybody here gets Kenya talk – I was trying to make your insider’s discussion accessible, to translate for the masses ;). As for being over 30, if that makes you old, you’re in good company here in the mutiny.
… hmm… i’ve heard similar arguments before… sometimes from this side, sometimes from the other… hope you dont land on the other side dear lad… but it might be an illuminating experience.
just kidding… but now i’ll expect the seniors discount at the next mutiny get together.. and y’all better call me baujee from now on.
so out of curiosity how old do you think I am dhaavak?
Have to agree with the ruling as the school already had an accommodating uniform policy. And it’s nothing new – people get sent home for dying their hair, getting a strange haircut, wearing excessive jewellery etc. But I do feel sorry for the poor girl – losing both of your parents so quickly would be devastating. Perhaps HuT is the only supportive group these unfortunate children have.
Actually, this was pretty high profile – wasn’t Cherie Blair involved with her original case?
Cherie Blair was the solicitor. I think she was involved through the entire process, which should shield the government from accusations of being anti-Muslim.
Read our threads on this on Pickled Politics. The whole thing was a scam to bully a school of 80% Muslim girls, a Bangladeshi Muslim headmistress, and a school with the chairman of the local council of mosques on the board of governors, all of whom apporoved of the uniform, as did local imams who were consulted. It was an attempt to hustle and persecute moderate Muslims by ideologues of the Islamist thug group Hizb ut Tahrir a.k.a Pizza Hut.
The judgment is a good thing because of this – they were not going to be bullied. Incidentally, when the headmistress of the school, of Bengali Muslim background, took over the school it was failing and had bad results. In the space of ten or so years she has turned it around and made it into one of the most successful and high achieving schools in the area. It was her being challenged by local Pizza Hut activists – they wanted to bully moderate Muslims at a school that has made Muslim girls successful. It is a good decision.
I’m talking good ol Visa Oshwal Girls here…okay, I hear the jeers already.
The idea of a uniform in school is a swell idea. My boss was telling me how his kid goes to a very uppity public school in Mclean, VA and the other day, he had to cough up $300 for about four tee shirts and a pair of jeans. The kid is 11 years old…He was lamenting about the school not having a uniform.
It’s as simple as this, when in the middle east etc, they expect the women there, foreign or otherwise to dress according their norms, then why cannot Shabina and others like her dress the way is acceptable in Europe and in other places? I don’t expect her to walk around in the NSFW version of a private school uniform (nice one KD..made me laugh) but the school already made enough allowances.
Dost, I pointed out what happened when I was in school because the school I went to followed the British system and had a uniform. None of the girls, and not even the super devout ones, tried to pull something like this off.
For just this once, I have to say that the French were on to something when they banned all sorts of religious attire.
Vikram said:
I don’t really understand the relevance of this comment in the context of this discussion. Are you just saying this because you want to say it? Or are you trying to say that because most muslim countries are screwed up and don’t respect peoples rights, freedom of religion, etc, that we in the West now have the right to deny Muslims rights or treat them like anyone else? To me, we (and I mean we in the West), should be doing the right thing, regardless of what others in the world are doing. So if it’s right to allow this girl to wear the jilbab, fine…and if it’s not right, fine. But the decision should not be based in any way on one’s opinion of muslim countries.
Kenyandesi said:
I’m not really sure I understand the analogy, but in any case, public school is sponsored/provided by the government, which must respect religious freedoms. Whereas, religious institutions are for the most part private organizations, and one can reasonably expect that they should be able to enforce a dress code.
Again, fundamental difference here… education is a right for residents of the country. Also, at least in the States, you are required to go to school, at least to a point. However, it is not your right to join the armed forces, you are not required to (at least not in UK and the states) and you will not be at a disadvantage if you do not join the armed forces (whereas someone who does not receive a decent education is at great economic disadvantage).
As to your question about whether I think there should be a uniform in public schools; I believe that there should not be a strict uniform, but rather a dresscode which could mandate that certain types of clothing or accessories should not be worn for safety or decency reasons. I do see the appeal and benefits of having a uniform in public schools; I just feel that there are too many problems with mandating a uniform in a public school. Maybe I’ll change my mind someday.
I would like to see a girl wear a skirt to a public school in saudi arabia…..
Muslims like to change the policies in the foreign countries they flee to, instead of changing the policies in the muslim countries that forced them to flee in search of better oportunities…
How many Muslims do you know that fled their home countries due to human rights/religious freedom issues? While I realize that there are elements in Muslim society in the west (HuT, etc), who probably have an extreme viewpoint and are active in trying to change policies, the characterization that I see in this comments of all Muslims being these terrible people who run away from their countries and ruin the countries that they go to (see posts by Vikram and Zee), is quite disturbing. The vast majority of Muslims (at least in the US) came here due to better economic opportunities, just like most other immigrants. Only a minority of immigrants move here for reasons other than that.
Anyways, I’m just going to stop arguing about this as its obvious that there’s a strong anti-muslim bias here where alot of people can’t see beyond the backwardness of certain muslim countries and try to focus on what is right or wrong in the UK…
Vikram said:
this dude just doesnt give up. ok already, we get it, u got issues with muslims and islam.
Zee said:
make that some, a very few muslims. i dont understand this preoccupation with bunching all muslims in the same basket. there are neo-nazi groups in germany attacking/killing/harassing turkish and other immigrants, should we then assume all germans are like this? there are some american sex-tourists going to india and thailand and other s.e. asian countries to molest and abuse little children, so i guess all american men must be the same.
heck, i’m not even a muslim, but have lived around enough muslims in various countries and know enough about islam to know that VAST majority of them, them being the 2nd largest and faster growing religion in the planet, of which the 1st and 2nd biggest populations are in indonesia and india respectively, are not in the business of radicalism.
many, who know, not simply read in arabic, but actually know the contents of the qu’ran are scratching their heads wondering what the heck these extremists are talking about, because it’s not in the book. and it’s not their responsibility or duty to stand up everytime some idiot in the name of th ereligion does something idiotic or racist or evil. we can all stand up for human rights, but lets not kid ourselves that we all do this about all human rights violations all the time all over the world.
honestly, this is the same sort of b.s. that people on the other end of the spectrum believe in, that all westerners are out to destrol indiginous cultures, and take over with bottles of coke and ipods and nike tshirts.
it sounds stupid when they think it, it sounds stupid that people who should knwow better espouse such ridiculous notions.
OMG!!!
dost, seriously, i thought i was howling at the moon and yelling into the wind here.
thank god there is a rational voice of reason. i’m bout to step out and let the door hit me on the way out.
on another blog, similar comments being said, except these are primarily by non-asian non muslim folks with eerily similar blinders.
i guess when u gotta hate, u just going to do it no matter what…
boom boom dishoom dishoom. Well put, dost and dudette.
Dost, given that you have a fundamental issue with the idea of the UNIFORM itself, you’re going to want to allow people to wear what they like within certain parameters. I on the other hand firmly believe in having a uniform, so i beleive as long as no on is being asked to be immodest, if you go to a school that does not allow a certain type of dress and you have alternative (in this care TWO other schools that allowed the jibab), then why not move? Was this really a case of discrimination, or was it just a political statement made for the sake of making it? If this man really cared about his sisters education he would have found alternatives for her.
Also NOWHERE in the Koran does it REQUIRE women to wear a jibab.
I really don’t think this is an issue of muslims being uppity, it’s a matter of a brother being uppity and using his sister as a pawn. And in that sense I completely uphold the decision of the courts.
Neither the Kaaba nor the Golden temple are privately owned. They are state owned. Dress codes apply. Those are two very quick examples.
unrelated, but interesting
from the beeb:
they look like free flowing salwaars to me
Interesting that you should choose to defend Islamic fanatics by using the analogies of a murderous political doctrine and pedophiles.
I agree that we have differing viewpoints on whether or not public schools should require uniforms, and as I indicated before, I respect your viewpoint. However, at least in an American constitutional context (i realize that this is a UK issue, but speaking broadly), my point is that there is a constitutional rights issue here. They have to decide whether or not one should be allowed to wear this type of clothing to a public school if one believes that it is a part of their religious expression. IF the answer to this is yes, they should be allowed, then it does not matter that other schools allow it; if this school doesn’t, they are infringing upon the constitutional rights of the girl. However, if it is decided that public schools do not have a duty to allow this level of religious expression, then fine, this school is within its rights. All i’m saying is that this debate should be framed as one of constitutional rights, and not, what you think Islam requires. Different people have different perspectives on how to practice their faith, and it is not up to you or I to tell someone what to do in terms of religion.
I think it is intellectually dishonest to make general statements such as this. There is disagreement amongst muslim jurists as to what appropriate/required dress is, and there are, IMO, reasonable opinions on both sides of this argument. But to say that it is not required and says so in the Quran is not accurate. There are entire books devoted to these issues, and I am neither knowledgable enough, nor have enough space here to go into that.
You’ll note that I said, ‘for the most part’. You’ve pointed out two examples…great. If you can prove to me that more than, say, 20% of mosques are state owned, then I would agree. In any case, I’m not sure I understood the relevance of that argument anyways, but I’d say MOST mosques are private, and thus are not the same as a public school with regard to dress code.
With regards to the Golden Temple, I’d be grateful if evidence could be provided that it is indeed owned by “the state”. I was under the impression that the Golden Temple falls under the jurisdiction of the Akal Takht and the SGPC.
Yes but this dress code is defined by Sikh religious traditions based on precedents stretching back at least 300 years, along with the established consensus on this issue by the Akal Takht and the SGPC. Dress codes within gurdwaras are not defined by the Indian government.