Iram Janjua [Legal Consultant, Forum Against Islamophobia & Racism (FAIR)]: "The number of practising Muslims in Britain and Europe is increasing with some women preparing to manifest a more stricter affirmation of their religious identity by choosing to wear the niqab (face veil) as opposed to the more common hijab (headscarf) and this is where the controversy lies. Here, I do not discuss the rights and wrongs of the niqab for that is an individual choice to be made by Muslim women, but rather I intend to draw attention to the legal implications of banning the niqab at various public institutions.

In practice, most institutions, such as schools, are free to devise their uniform policies which are, in most cases, open to interpretation. The case of the student, Shabina Begum, instigated the inquisitiveness in Islamic dress in schools. The school objected to the student's decision to wear the jilbab (long gown) and in a judicial review the student claimed interference with her right to manifest her religion and right to education protected by the European Convention on Human Rights. After several deliberations (by the courts and media alike) a final decision by the House Of Lords ruled in favour of the school.

The Shabina Begum case provides very little insight as far as niqabs are concerned as it was an individual ruling, a different element of dress (as opposed to a face covering) and, therefore, unlikely to have set any precedent, as Lord Bingham put it "The House is not, and could not be, invited to rule on whether Islamic dress, or any feature of Islamic dress, should or should not be permitted in the schools of this country". Therefore, the current legal position of niqabs is a lot more uncertain. However, the recent interest surrounding the niqab invoked by the British Minster Jack Straw MP (who wrote in a column that he considered the veil a "visible statement of separation and of difference") [1] could eventually bring a challenge to the Lords.

Last year a Muslim classroom assistant was suspended by a school for wearing the niqab in lessons, she was later sacked. The employment tribunal dismissed her claim for religious discrimination but did award her £1100 compensation for victimisation. [2] She appealed against the decision which is scheduled to be heard at the Employment Appeals Tribunal later this year. [3] In a hotly contested trial, holding not only legal ramifications but also social and political, the tremulous decision will be controversial whatever the outcome.

A High Court case involving a 12 year old pupil and her head-teacher, who banned her from wearing the niqab in the classroom, is in progress. The Head-teacher explaining her actions said "it [the veil] would hamper the teaching and learning of the pupil and impact on her communication and socialising with others." [4] Conversely, evidence revealed that the young pupil's three elder sisters spent their time in the same school wearing the niqab without interference. All her sisters had progressed well at school, university and beyond whilst wearing the niqab. [5] We await the judgement. In the meantime, an Education Minister announced a policy for schools granting them the green light to ban the niqab on "safety, security and teaching" grounds. [6]

Universities have affianced in these acts too, with Imperial College in London announcing their ban on niqabs last summer. The students' union in revising the dress code chose to keep the veils ban in December, but as noted by FOSIS, it remains controversial among the college's Muslim students. [7]

Now with universities and schools banning the niqab it is only a matter of time other institutions will follow. Unless the problem is curtailed earlier, this could open the floodgate to other cases invoking similar claims. The Courts will, needless to say, have to perform a balancing act where, on the one hand, they need to acknowledge concerns with, what seems to be, fostering social cohesion and a myriad of other issues, including security and preventing crime, and on the other hand against those wishing to simultaneously exercise their right to religious freedom and education.

On initial analysis it appears that such cases brought before the judiciary will warrant their own analysis because of their specific considerations and, therefore, it could be for some time before we see any consistency, perhaps because of the judges own reluctance to legislate in this sphere vis-à-vis Lord Bingham.

As a last resort then the British Executive may intervene and legislate to achieve consistency and follow in the footsteps of the Netherlands, Turkey and even France, but the question remains, just how far will they go? As far as the European Court of Human Rights is concerned the case of Leyla Sahin v Turkey upheld Turkey's decision to ban the hijab at her university as it was in line with Turkey's secular aspirations. [8] Nevertheless, as the aforementioned pending cases indicate we may be on course for a renewed decision by the European Court of Human Rights.

This is one to watch out for…."