LONDON: The Bosnian Central Parliament is to discuss a new law proposed by the Bosnian Serb Party of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD) on the 1st of September 2010 to ban the face veil for which Muslim women have held a protest outside the Central Parliament in Sarajevo. IHRC is asking its activists to write to the President of Bosnia and Herzegovina to ask him to urge Bosnian parliamentarians to veto the bill on the face veil. In April 2010, the SNSD sent a proposed bill to the Bosnian Central Assembly “to ban clothes that prevent identification”. The Parliament had earlier scheduled the discussion for July but when a veiled female human rights activist attended the parliamentary session as an observer, the discussion was postponed until the 1st of September 2010. Muslim Bosnian activists have been campaigning against the proposed ban under the slogan “Our Niqab, Our Choice, Our Right”. They argue that it would take away their religious freedom and further exacerbate the situation by possibly leading to a ban on the headscarf. A possible ban will alienate face veiled women from the society by imposing a 24 hour curfew on them. The bill proposes a fine of 50 Euros for women who violate the ban. France and Syria have already banned the face veil in recent moves. The Netherlands and Belgium are also planning to impose a ban of the face veil soon. Considering the fact that only a handful of Bosnian women wear the face veil, the move is a rather strong indication of increasing trend of Islamophobia that has been enforced by intolerant, racist and fascist political groups. IHRC believes that according to international human rights law, specifically article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) the freedom to manifest religion and belief individually or with others is protected and considered fundamental to freedom of expression. Article 26 of the ICCPR outlines the right to non discrimination on the grounds of religion. Article 20 of the ICCPR states that international human rights law protects people against the promotion of religious hatred which amounts to incitement of discrimination, hostility or violence. Therefore, various legal expert and human rights organizations deem this move to be in breach of the aforementioned articles and international laws. As well as upholding the aforementioned human rights treatises, the government would have to outline why the ban is necessary, in order for it to be lawful. According to international human rights law, a government can only enforce such a ban when a three step process is met: they must be prescribed by law; they must address a specific legitimate purpose permitted by international law; and must also be demonstrably necessary and proportionate for that purpose. Since there is no causal link between security risks and a woman wearing the niqab, the ban is baseless. The European Court of Human Rights states the right to freedom of expression includes forms of expression “that offend, shock or disturb the state or any section of the population”. Therefore, regardless of negative public opinion, the government has not presented sufficient evidence to ban the niqab. The Islamic Human Rights Commission is alarmed by the widespread anti-Islamic rhetoric by various European governments that are now translating into policy which causes a fear of hate crime being on the rise as a result. IHRC
