Start A Petition

Niqab Court Row: Compromise Reached Over Identification

World  (tags: Islam, UK political correctness gone mad )

- 1742 days ago -
A woman who refused to show her face in court for religious reasons has reached a compromise over the confirmation of her identity.

Select names from your address book   |   Help

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.


Stan B (123)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 1:18 am
When the judge originally said this woman had to remove her niqab before her trial could continue he was universally praised. It looks like his political masters have given him new instructions.
Mosques throughout the UK are now singing " Fool Britannia, Britannia waives the rules."

Rahman Qureshi (76)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 1:37 am
Judge turned coward. Not only sad, but dangerous. Catering to Islam never ends well.

Carol Dreeszen (346)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 1:47 am
*****The judge warned that in the absence of a clearer position, some faiths could be given a "degree of privilege".

This pretty well says it all! In other words if it's a Muslim we can let them go! Wrong move Judge! No wonder this ideology has taken over the world the way it has! They just walk in and say "excuse me but this is the way it's going to be" and everyone says "You got it!" Totally disgusting!

Giana P (398)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 2:07 am
Everyone is so afraid of "offending" them and their religion - and this fear is what is making them stronger day by day!

Pam A (6)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 2:22 am
Religion is one thing, but letting it control and dictate way of life that isn't ours is beyond a joke. Time we took a stand. When in their country we are expected to conform - headgear etc.

Danuta W (1250)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 3:23 am

Patricia E G (54)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 3:24 am
The typical wardrobe of a local resident varies
from basic to complicated, accordingly.
The laws regarding a foreigner's attire is
critical in a legal matter.
We rely on our courts to make a judicious
Thank you Stan for opening this
topic for discussion~

Joan H (20)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 4:54 am
This is so wrong. So if she goes to prison does she still get to wear the hijab over her orange or striped suit? Yes, this is a battle we're losing because of our political correctness and stupidity.

Gillian M (218)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 5:01 am
The niqab I not part of Islam but is a part of the male domination and control of women.

I am appalled that the police woman was allowed to identify the defendant as she is not an officer of the court and she must identify herself to the court. This is a real breach of protocol that I object to. I have no problem with her being covered all over by a hijab or a scarf etc over her head any more than I would a Sikh wearing his turban or an orthodox Jew wearing a kippah or wig, depending on sex.

Jay S (116)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 5:09 am
So, if I say my religion says I am not allowed to attend court at all and it is against my religion to be convicted of any crime, or that if I am I must be housed in a 5 star hotel for the duration with freedom to come and go to do my religious observance daily, what would they do then? Well, laugh me out of the court, unless my religion and my co-religionists riot and threaten death and violence when they are offended, then I guess I'd get a free house and all my living expenses paid for life. Ridiculous!

Carola May (20)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 5:12 am
Not surprising as we have here in the UK a shocking number of estimated Muslim sex slave gangs that prey on non-Muslims girls, using and abusing them, and when the police were told by some of the first victims to come forward they turned them away! The prosecutor was a Muslim and refused to go after his brother Muslims. Why was he not arrested and charged with obstructing justice??? You guessed it. Don't want to start riots and offend Muslims.

This country is lost. No wonder over 60% of Britons want to emigrate to someplace else. So sad.

Lindsey O (19)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 6:00 am
There's one other reason for any Defendant or witness to remain unveiled. The Judge, the jury, the prosecutor, and the defense attorney all need to be able to watch her face throughout the proceedings. Because a defendant's (or witness') demeanor is legitimately at issue when deciding on whether to believe her or not. Our faces tell quite a lot about our truthfulness. And allowing her to remain veiled hampered the prosecution in this case. Just as in Australia a woman was unable to be prosecuted at all due to her veiling - it was impossible to legally determine that she was the actual perpetrator (although there's no practical doubt of it).

Veiling's perfectly fine in many situations - but when it comes to anything connected with the law it should be prohibited.

Past Member (0)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 6:33 am
Thats the way this country is going to the dogs or albeit the muslims
Stupid politicians and judges not wanting to upset them They probably wont be around to have to see their children or grandchildren come under Islam so they dont care


Beth S (330)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 8:59 am
Muslims in the West are the most litigious and intimidating group around. I'm sure the judge isn't dumb, but he's been gotten to, which probably means a number of threats of sorts and possibly some carrots too for not sticking to his guns.

The West needs to find the cajones to stand up to this evil parasite called Islam or it will have to kiss those cajones goodbye.

Gene J (290)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 10:26 am
Well, we had two Muslim women on trial here for soliciting funds for Al Shabab, and a number of Somali young men disappear only to turn up later suicide bombers, one of them made it back here and testified. One of the women refused to stand when the Judge entered the courtroom and to remove her veil. She spent a couple nights in jail under contempt of court before she decided perhaps the court was due the respect we Americans require if one is to live in this country and pretend to abide by its laws. They were both convicted by the way.

Kenneth Davies (0)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 12:31 pm

Svetlana B (20)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 12:34 pm
Noted TY

Muriel Servaege (53)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 1:11 pm
Thank you, Stan. I also think the judge "turned coward' and this attitude can have serious conséquences, if not with this case, with others.

Gerry W (0)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 2:15 pm
The KKK covered their faces so they could commit crimes against humanity and remain anomynous.

Roger G (154)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 2:28 pm
I agree with G.W., many criminals are hiding behind niqabs to commit robberies, people are not allowed to enter banks wearing bikes helmets so why should they be allowed to enter state and courts building wearing them ?
What do they have to hide ?
noted, thanks

valda p (13)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 3:30 pm
What happened to -seperation of church and state? -a country cannot have 2 sets of laws and govern properly islam- demands and gets- they control by fear tactics -this is another -victory for islam and -sharia -they said they don't have to go to war -they will take over from within and that is -exactly what is happening with the help of the -dhimmi's and the politically correct.

reft h (66)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 3:30 pm
They don't want their photos on drivers licenses either. They don't want any sort of photo ID, something the rest of us have to have.

Tom Edgar (56)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 4:08 pm
There is still the law prevailing that says one may nit go about in public disguised. The Koran only says women (and men) should be dressed circumspectly, nowhere does it say a woman must be completely covered, This is the code enforced in primitive tribal cultures.

marie C (163)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 4:54 pm
Wish I could send everyone green stars you all speak the way I feel this is so defeatist what has happened to us I guess we are just frightened of reprisals

Robyn Vorsa (4)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 5:24 pm
This is where it becomes so hard. There is a basic cultural clash here. On one hand you have the courts that need to be able to do their job and the other, a woman who dressed a certain way according to her religion, culture and tradition. Unfortunately there can be no compromise as justice needs to be served, but how to do it without violating someone's beliefs.
It is easy to sneer at Islam but the truth is, it's far more complicated than that.
Thanks for the thought provoking article.

Kara C (15)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 5:51 pm
Why should she get special privleges just because of her faith? People should be treated qual regardless of faith with means fronting up to court with your face visible to everyone. People can't wear sunglasses or helmets in court so why should she be able to cover up.

Carla van der Meer (648)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 7:15 pm

Sheila D (28)
Sunday September 15, 2013, 10:23 pm
It does seem rather odd that she would be allowed to remain covered in court. Who knows what she may be carrying underneath all that black cloth? Then again, the matter was technically resolved with the female officer. I tend to agree with most of the comments regarding special privileges in court and the complications between church and state. Thanks for the article, Stan.

Cheryl Morel (4)
Monday September 16, 2013, 12:37 am
England receives billions from the Arab world, therefore they can not reject these people. It is so sad to see a country lose its self respect all for the sake of money. The moral of the story is NEVER LET MONEY CLOUD YOUR VISION OR SELF RESPECT. The law is the law and that is the way it should be and respected in any country. If you were put in that position in the Arab world, you would be told to respect there rules when you are there. I have seen governments and even the QUEEN bow to rules of other countries. They are sure to open up a can of worms here, because the next time someone comes in with sunglasses or any other disguise, for what ever reason, then there is going to be a problem. We have many criminals all over the world who are extremely intelligent, who watch and wait to use whatever they can to get themselves off.

Stan B (123)
Monday September 16, 2013, 2:13 am
Thanks for all your interesting comments. There's been a further development connected to this issue with the following statement from Jeremy Browne, a liberal democrat at the Home Office.

Jeremy Browne, a Liberal Democrat, said there needs to be a national debate about whether the state should step in to protect young women from having the veil “imposed” on them.

Mr Browne said he is “instinctively uneasy” about banning behaviour, but suggested the measure may still be necessary to ensure freedom of choice for girls in Muslim communities.

The Home Office minister is the first senior Liberal Democrat to raise such deep concerns about Islamic dress in public places. A growing number of Conservative MPs also want the Government to consider a ban.

Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, has suggested he may support banning the veil in classrooms, but downplayed the chances of wider restrictions.

He said: “My own view, I don’t think we should end up like different countries where we tell people how they go about their business. I do think there is an issue with teachers in the classroom…that might be an area where a full veil might be inappropriate.”


patrica and edw jones (190)
Monday September 16, 2013, 2:31 am
IMO the veil, burqa etc should be banned altogether. They live in a westernised society and should dress as we do. I don't give a fig whether they like it or not. They have another option - leave the country and return to whence they came. They could always have a National Dress Up Day.......once a year....that would be ok methinks.

Madhu Pillai (22)
Monday September 16, 2013, 4:05 am
Seem to be getting away with anything, this softly softly approach has only emboldened them. France had the right idea.

Cheryl Morel (4)
Monday September 16, 2013, 7:08 am
Stan B .. Nick Clegg, Deputy Prime Minister quoted "My own view, I don't think we should end up like different countries where we tell people how they GO ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS etc. dose this apply to Muslims only? My my, we can see that he dose not want to upset the Arab world other wise the billions will be stopped. Why have different laws for certain communities. Well, let me see, ah, there is that M word again MONEY.

Winnie A (179)
Monday September 16, 2013, 7:40 am

Helen Porter (39)
Monday September 16, 2013, 12:11 pm
We must be strong and hold to our freedoms or our children will become child brides.

P. L. Neola (21)
Thursday September 19, 2013, 7:39 pm
‘Judge Murphy said: "It cannot be satisfactory that one judge may go one way and another judge will go another way. Is it not right that there must be a common approach?"’

I agree! The U.S. is experiencing these kinds of issues as well!
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story

Loading Noted By...Please Wait


butterfly credits on the news network

  • credits for vetting a newly submitted story
  • credits for vetting any other story
  • credits for leaving a comment
learn more

Most Active Today in World

Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of or its affiliates.

New to Care2? Start Here.