Islamic scarf controversy in France

Controversy over wearing of the hijab in France

In France, there is an ongoing social, political, and legal debate concerning the wearing of the hijab and other forms of Islamic coverings in public. The cultural framework of the controversy can be traced to France's history of colonization in North Africa, but escalated into a significant public debate in 1989 when three girls were suspended from school for refusing to remove their headscarves. Since 1989, the debate has grown to include the wearing of Islamic coverings on public beaches, when playing sports, and by politicians. According to several researchers, the 2004 headscarf ban "reduces the secondary educational attainment of Muslim girls and affects their trajectory in the labor market and family composition in the long run."

The initial affaire du foulard was sparked on 18 September 1989 when three female Moroccan students were suspended for refusing to remove their head scarves in class at Collège Gabriel Havez (a middle school) in Creil. The students reached an agreement with the school on 9 October 1989, under which they wore the headscarves on school grounds but removed them once they entered their classrooms. On 10 October 1989, the girls again refused to take off their scarves when in class. In September 1994, a new memorandum, the "François Bayrou memo", was issued, delineating the difference between "discreet" religious symbols able to be brought into classrooms, and "ostentatious" religious symbols (including the hijab), which were to be forbidden in public establishments. Joan Scott argued that right wing parties (including Jean Marie Le Pen's National Front) used the controversies to conflate North African immigrants with Islamic fundamentalism. In Egypt and Turkey, for example, wearing the scarf is controversially forbidden in certain professional contexts.

According to some feminist groups, as well as some human rights advocacy groups, wearing the scarf can symbolize a woman's submission to men. It is feared that permitting the veil in schools risks opening the door to other practices that exist in the Muslim world. It is often speculated that forbidding the hijab would limit freedom. Rather, the argument put forward by some feminists is that the hijab is not a free choice, but a result of social pressures (i. e., if a law does not forbid the practice of wearing the hijab, social pressure may render it obligatory). These arguments are shared by some Islamic feminists. Thus, Fadela Amara, the former president of the organisation Ni Putes Ni Soumises, stated that: "The veil is the visible symbol of the subjugation of women, and therefore has no place in the mixed, secular spaces of France's public school system." Another francophone Muslim influential for his work on public welfare, vertical align=sup, shares the view of these Islamic feminists and similarly expressed support for Tunisia's ban on the veil in public workplaces in those terms: "If today we accept the headscarf, tomorrow we'll accept that women's rights to work and vote and receive an education be banned and they'll be seen as just a tool for reproduction and housework."

Certain individuals and associations consider the scarf to be a symbol of belonging to the Muslim community. According to this line of reasoning, women who wear the veil display their religious and community affiliation, which harms the unity and secularism of the French Republic. The position of the French government is that secularism in schools is incompatible with wearing ostentatious religious articles, whatever they be. However, in December 2003, President Chirac extended this policy for all public secondary education establishments, risking fanning the tensions between communities within the multicultural French society. France is home to both the largest Jewish and Muslim minorities in Western Europe.

In the mid 2000s, a majority of French educators opposed the veil in general, and particularly in classes.

The majority of French people, according to a survey conducted in the last four months of 2003, responded that they would be in favor of a law forbidding the veil in schools. In 2013, 86% of respondents in a poll for i Télé were in favour of a ban for headscarfs and other religious and political symbols in both public and private institutions for children. The poll was made after the Court of Cassation ruled that a private crèche did not have the right to fire a woman who wore an Islamic headscarf.

According to the same surveys, Furthermore, some Islamic feminists have expressed offense at double standards implicit in some (non Muslim) feminist arguments. Thus, when some feminists began defending the headscarf on the grounds of "tradition", Fadela Amara countered: "It's not tradition, it's archaic! French feminists are totally contradictory. When Algerian women fought against wearing the headscarf in Algeria, French feminists supported them. But when it's some young girl in a French suburb school, they don't. They define liberty and equality according to what colour your skin is. It's nothing more than neocolonialism." A third interpretation of the principle of secularity based on its original formulation recalls that, according to the law, "all are equal to show and express their religious opinions in public as well as in private", and that the French state has the responsibility to guarantee access to free, public education to all Frenchmen. Another argument is that making it illegal sends a message that hate crimes may be more tolerable. An obvious concern that arises is what would qualify as an offensive scarf. The Islamic requirement for a 'Hijab' is to cover the hair and neck in combination to not wearing tight fitting clothing. As such, Muslim women could wear a combination of a hat and scarf which would qualify as a 'Hijab' but would not be obviously religious.

In July 2003, President Jacques Chirac appointed a commission to examine the interaction between secularism and religious symbols in schools. Chirac adopted these findings "in the spirit of secularism", and the law, sometimes referred to as "the veil law", was voted in by the French parliament in March 2004. The law permits discreet signs of faith, such as small crosses, Stars of David, and the palm shaped amulets representing a hand of Fatima.

In many cases, the exact extent of possible application of the law is hard to ascertain, and has led to further complications: For example, is the law applicable to something other than the Islamic veil which covers the hair, such as a bandana, which does not outwardly indicate religious affiliation? Eventually, the case was settled in court (see below). Would veiled parents be able to enter their children's schools? Former education minister François Fillon has stated that the law does not apply whatsoever to the parents of students. The Mediator of the Republic has agreed with this stance. However, in some cities, such as Montreuil, Seine Saint Denis, where integration of large numbers of Muslims is an acute problem, veiled parents are frequently denied entry. In May 2005, the mother of a student was denied permission to run a stand at her son's school festival. After much publicity, the interdiction was lifted. On 14 May 2007, the High authority for the struggle against discrimination and for equality (HALDE) affirmed that veiled parents should be allowed to attend school activities. While the law forbidding the veil applies to students attending publicly funded primary schools and high schools, it does not refer to universities. Applicable legislation grants them freedom of expression as long as public order is preserved. However, veiled students are sometimes denied attendance. In 2019, controversy surrounding the law erupted when a Muslim woman chaperoning her son's school field trip was told to remove her veil, sparking a debate regarding the right of private citizens to wear the scarf while taking part in school activities. Far Right politicians pushed for a ban on the scarf in such situations, citing the fact that students had to adhere to a ban on all religious head coverings, and thus mothers should abide by the same rules. French Prime Minister Édouard Philippe defended the right of mothers to wear the hijab, claiming that secularism meant defending the religious freedoms of the people. However, French Education Minister Jean Michel Blanquer, despite acknowledging the right of women to wear as they pleased, expressed his wish that mothers would not wear the hijab on school trips. Others from Emmanuel Macron's centrist party also expressed some support for a ban on the hijab on school trips. Others within the party expressed their opposition to those sentiments. Public personalities also came out against the statements. In an open letter, 90 public personalities signed an open letter calling on Macron to come out in support of Muslim mothers wearing the hijab on school trips.

In public hospitals, employees are expected to respect the principle of secularism. In nursing schools, interviews are an official requirement for entry, during which applicants may be asked if they are willing to remove their veil either altogether or for the purpose of wearing a disposable cap, such as those worn in operating rooms. As far as patients are concerned, the rule is to respect religious preferences.

Some later court decisions have clarified issues that remained open. These decisions were issued by the highest French administrative court, the Conseil d'Etat, and by the European Court of Human Rights. The Conseil d'État affirmed on 5 December 2007 that the ban also apply to clothing elements that were not inherently religious, but had a religious affiliation because of the behaviour of the student. Through this holding, the court upheld expulsions of students wearing a Sikh Keski and a bandana. On 4 December 2008, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) affirmed the legality of the ban. Although the cases dated prior to the 2004 law, the Court rationale was consistent with the law: the ECHR held that the national authorities were obliged to take great care to ensure that ( ) the manifestation by pupils of their religious beliefs on school premises did not take on the nature of an ostentatious act that would constitute a source of pressure and exclusion. In 2012, UN Human Rights Committee has found a violation of ICCPR in case of expulsion of a Sikh from a school based on the 2004 law.

On 12 August 2016, the mayor of Cannes in southern France banned full body swimsuits, also called "burkinis", from the beach, arguing that it was considered a symbol of Islamic extremism and might spark tensions. Shortly after, on a Nice beach, four armed police officers forced a Muslim woman to take off her burkini. A photo of the incident spread quickly and led to criticism of the ban. The woman was fined 38 euro for wearing the burkini, and four other women were fined 38 euros for wearing their burkinis on the beach in Cannes. On 25 August 2016, the Human Rights League and anti Islamophobia groups described the ban as a dangerous and illegal threat on basic freedoms, particularly freedom of belief and religion. The UN, Spain, Italy, Germany, and Canada have criticised and ruled out France's ban on the burkini, claiming it is a very clear violation of human rights, and it does not respect Muslim women's dignity or modesty. At least two other cities in France followed with similar bans, and one of these laws was appealed to the Conseil d’Etat, who overturned the bans.

Alma and Lila Lévy are sisters who rose to fame at the centre of the French controversy over the veil in 2003 when they were expelled from school. The controversial expulsion of the Lévy sisters from Lycée Henri Wallon, in the suburb of Aubervilliers of Paris, ignited an international debate. The Lévy sisters were expelled for wearing the hijab. The girls' father, Laurent Lévy, a Jewish French lawyer, was quick to point out the antisemitic furore regarding the media's focus on his ethnicity, "I am Jewish by Vichy rules." In an interview with the BBC, he explained that his ex wife, his daughters' mother, is a Muslim from Kabyle, Algeria. The sisters wrote a book about their experience.

Although FIFA allows women to play in hijab, the French Football Federation has banned women from wearing hijab in competitive matches. In 2022, the French Senate passed a law that would have codified this ban, although it failed in the National Assembly. Les Hijabeuses, a collective of Muslim soccer players, protested the bill and are now challenging the FFF ban.

The veil controversy and its legislative consequences have revealed problems associated with the practice of the Islamic faith insofar as religion in French society and institutions (as opposed to the problems of integration of individuals). Partially fueled by the fear of a "communitarization" or "Islamization" of French society, the controversy has also fed off fears in certain sections of the Muslim community in France of "forced assimilation" and a slippery slope that would seek to ban more and more expressions of the Muslim faith. The controversy has also, however, brought the issue of the place of Islam in French society to the forefront of debate. The veil controversy has been used opportunely to promote the expression of a French form of Islam, distinct from the Islam in the French Muslims' countries of origin. The presence of Muslim Frenchwomen wearing tricolour veils and shouting, "I am French!" in protests in Paris against the law forbidding the veil is one example thereof. A survey conducted by the French polling organization CSA in January 2004, revealed that more than 90% of French Muslims claim to subscribe to culturally French principles such as the importance of the Republic and equal rights among men and women. The figure falls to 68% for respondents who believe in the separation of church and state. In contrast, a majority (50–60%) of those surveyed responded unfavorably to the law of laïcité, and would prefer to see their wife or daughter free to wear the veil. In 2004, a year after the law was voted in, one organization opposed to it, called the "Committee of the 15th of March and Liberty", published a report on the law's effects. The report cites the files of 806 students affected by the law. Of the 806 students, 533 have accepted the law and no longer wear their veils in class. The report also gives an assessment of students who have left the French school system because of this issue. Among them, 67 have pursued their studies abroad. Another 73 of those 806 suspended or expelled from schools over the veil have chosen to take government run vertical align=sup correspondence courses in order to finish their studies. The number of those who have chosen to study via other, non government forms of correspondence schools is unknown. The opening of the 2005 school year passed largely without incident, and opposition to the law seems to have given way to broader public opinion. However, the actual number of those who no longer attend French junior high and high schools over their veils is unknown.

In 2010, a public debate arose and France passed a law that bans the wearing of full face covering, including but not limited to burqas and niqābs, in public. The law was constitutionally cleared so that it came into force in April 2011. That debate and ban are separate from the above discussed debate on the hijab in public schools, in that the new law does not pertain to Islamic scarves but rather to the much rarer full face versions, as well as other full face coverings (such as masks and balaclavas), and in that the new law applies to all citizens in public spaces regardless of religion or claimed tradition (and regardless of gender).