The French tout themselves as die-hard secularists. Secularists believe that religious institutions and government operate independently and should not interfere with each other’s affairs. They champion equal treatment of all citizens regardless of their religious beliefs, with laws and policies that do not favor or disadvantage any specific religion. In line with these professed principles of laïcité (secularism), the French passed a law in 2004 prohibiting the hijab and any other “symbols or clothing in public schools and government institutions.
As France is hosting the Olympic Games, the hijab ban became news with many Muslim athletes calling out the inherent hypocrisy and apparent “Islamophobia” in prohibiting the hijab. Incidentally, France’s hijab ban only applies to French athletes competing at the Games; it does not apply to visiting competitors. The ban affects sports including football, basketball, volleyball, and boxing, covering all levels of competition, including amateur events.
Secularists often emphasize rationalism, human rights, and the importance of empirical evidence in forming public policies. That rationalism and respect for human rights was on full display in the Olympic opening ceremony as it featured a group of drag queens in a scene that evoked Leonardo da Vinci’s “The Last Supper,” a renowned mural painting that depicts the moment Jesus announces that one of his twelve apostles will betray him. Naturally, the Christian world took offense as the portrayal was seen as disrespectful and mocking their faith.
Just for the sake of perspective, Islam considers one’s religious belief to be a fundamental right and does not permit forced conversion. It strictly prohibits the mockery and derision of other faiths. “Revile not ye those whom they call upon besides Allah, lest they out of spite revile Allah in their ignorance,”says the Quran (6:108).
In June, a coalition of organizations, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, sent a letter to the International Olympic Committee, criticizing the ban and calling for IOC action.
The letter stated: “The bans imposed by the French sports authorities are discriminatory and prevent Muslim athletes who decide to wear the hijab from exercising their human right to play sport without discrimination of any kind. The bans also fly in the face of the human rights requirements for host countries and the IOC Strategic Framework on Human Rights, as well as being antithetical to the fundamental principles of Olympism.”
Anna Błuś, Amnesty International’s women’s rights researcher in Europe was forthright while saying, “It shows Muslim women that when the French authorities talk about equality between men and women, they don’t see them as women. They don’t count them. It’s really important for major human rights organizations such as ours, to be very vocal on this issue, and to publicly show solidarity with Muslim women’s rights groups.”
French basketball player, Hélène Bâ averred, “Our message is that we just want to play sports. Muslim women who wear the hijab have rights like any other citizen. If they see French hijabi players, they will say ‘Okay, I could be that girl, I can be that player, I can be that athlete.”
France justifies the ban in the name of “laïcité”, considering athletes representing France as public servants who must adhere to strict secularism. Commenting on the issue, the IOC stated, “They (French athletes) must respect the principles of secularism (laïcité) and neutrality, which, according to French law, means prohibition from wearing outwardly religious symbols, including the hijab, veil and headscarf when they are acting in their official capacity and on official occasions as members of the French national team.”
The French Sports Ministry spokesperson added, “There is no general ban on wearing the veil in sports fields in France. The law, clarified by administrative jurisprudence, outlines two specific cases.”
Proponents of the hijab ban assert that visible religious symbols, including the hijab, can create divisions and encourage sectarianism. They believe that by removing these symbols, a more cohesive and inclusive society can be built, where individuals are judged by their actions and character rather than their religious affiliations. Additionally, they argue that the ban protects young Muslim girls from potential coercion to wear the hijab, thus promoting individual freedom.
Clearly, the hijab ban is an infringement on religious freedom and an act of discrimination against Muslim communities. For many Muslim women, wearing the hijab is a deeply personal and spiritual choice, an expression of their faith, and a part of their identity. Isn’t the ban a denial of their right to practice their religion openly and an attempt to assimilate Muslims into a dominant culture that does not respect their beliefs? The ban exacerbates social exclusion and stigmatization of Muslims, particularly women, who will face increased hostility and marginalization. The hijab ban violates international conventions on religious freedom and non-discrimination.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights both affirm the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion, including the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs. The European Court of Human Rights has also dealt with cases challenging such bans, and while the court has sometimes upheld the bans, it has also recognized the importance of religious freedom in its rulings.
Further, the prohibition disempowers women by denying them agency over their own bodies and clothing choices. Such bans reinforce negative stereotypes and increase social divisions. By targeting specific religious practices, the state may inadvertently perpetuate a sense of otherness among Muslim communities. This can lead to increased isolation and alienation, counteracting efforts to integrate diverse populations and promote social cohesion.
The hijab is a powerful symbol of resistance against Islamophobia and discrimination. In the face of rising anti-Muslim sentiment in many parts of the world, wearing the hijab is an act of defiance and a statement of solidarity with a marginalized community. It serves as a reminder of the resilience and strength of Muslim women who continue to uphold their faith and identity despite societal pressures.
True empowerment comes from allowing women to make their own decisions about what to wear, rather than imposing state mandates on their attire. If one studies the concept of hijab in an unbiased manner, one will conclude that the hijab is not a tool of oppression, rather, it is a source of empowerment and liberation.