Despite a headscarf ban in two public secondary schools in Antwerp, the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium, was announced at the end of June, the new academic year took off with quite a bit of disturbance. One headmistress, Karin Heremans, claims that this was a well-considered decision taken after she viewed that some Muslim girls at her school were being pressured into wearing the Islamic veil. A specially designed room was provided for girls to take off their veil in the morning and put it back on when returning home, hoping that the girls would settle quite easily with the new rule. But reality hit them when pupils, parents and sympathizers of the Muslim community demonstrated at the gates of schools during the first week of September, saying that the ban was against the secular principles of freedom and choice. The new rule sadly resulted in girls staying home from school, parts of schools being vandalized during protests and even a death threat to one of the school’s principals. Legitimate or not? Although each school in Belgium’s Dutch-speaking region of Flanders had the right to autonomously decide whether or not to allow the scarf, the new rule’s legitimacy was being questioned and more and more people demanded that the politians should take their responsibility and react to the rising tumults at the Flemish school gates. First, reaction came from the mayor of Antwerp, Patrick Janssen, who prohibited any more protests at the schools, to prevent more vandalism, but he also invited some of the protesters’ spokespersons to discuss how they could peacefully use their right to demonstrate. One girl filed a complaint with the Belgian Council of State to contest the ban and optimistically thought she had a good case after one of the advocates said this was an unlawful decision. Yet, a bit later, on September 12, her complaint was rejected and a final decision was made by the Board of Flemish Schools stating that starting September 1, 2010, there would be a general ban on headscarves and conspicuous religious symbols in all public schools in Flanders, affecting around 700 schools. As for Antwerp, the general ban will be implemented in all schools, 300 in total. This year is therefore being considered a transition period, at least for those schools that hadn’t yet issued a ban. This decision was motivated by claiming that it encourages the sense of equality and that it prevents group formation and segregation based on external signals. Similar cases in Europe The Islamic headscarf has been an issue in several countries in the European Union, resulting in specific legal measures taken by governmental institutions or courts. Neighboring France passed a law in 2004, banning pupils from wearing conspicuous signs of their religion in school. By these are meant the Sikh turbans, large Christian crosses, Muslim headscarves and Jewish skullcaps. The very same ban would be difficult to introduce in Flanders, where a number of private Catholic schools exist. The French government at the time said that the state is undermining secularism if it allows students to wear religious symbols. Preserving the secular identity of the state was also Turkey’s motivation to ban headscarves from universities in the 1980’s. Yet, the country is still deeply divided on the possible threats to its modernity and secularism. What’s in a veil? Feelings wouldn’t run this high if for many citizens this headscarf ban wasn’t a reflection of a more deeply rooted problem in Flanders and in other multicultural parts of Europe as well. Arguments in the headscarf debate are as vague as they are diverse – against supposed social pressure, against group formation, against extremism and fundamentalism, against discrimination, pro neutrality, pro equal opportunities and so on. These arguments show that this debate is about more than protecting individual Muslim girls from social pressure. It’s about what people think the Islamic veil stands for and about how much we are prepared to allow religion into the public sphere. The fear of Islam is definitely advancing in European society and we have to guard ourselves from pursuing an Islamophobic approach. Worrying that wearing headscarves makes integration impossible or even leads to extremism can only mean that some decision-makers, as well as average citizens, lack some crucial knowledge or explanation regarding the Islamic faith. There has not been enough consultation with the affected groups of people to fully understand what is going on. The Muslim community has to be seen as a partner instead of being only the subject of the conversation. And of equal importance is that one consults the right spokesperson for this community. “Our own Muslim schools†Not all Muslims in Belgium agree with the comments of Antwerp Imam Nordin Taouil on the recent ban, who was displayed in the media as the spokesperson for Islam. He stated that Muslims don’t feel welcome anymore and he even suggested the community should found their own Muslim schools. Minister of Education, Pascal Smet, said he regrets this reaction, and reasoned that schools should be a reflection of society, paying attention to diversity and integration. The headscarf ban is a lose-lose situation. Social cohesion is being affected and irreversible damage is being created. However, something has to be done about this kind of previously mentioned peer pressure, banning headscarves for all adolescent Muslims isn’t an answer to the errors of some individuals. Making youngsters and parents aware of their actions should deserve more of our attention. BM
