According to Enewsroom and television media reports, Dr Parveen was scheduled to assume charge as an AYUSH doctor on December 20, but has chosen to step away following the incident. Her brother told a media channel that the decision was taken due to the severe mental distress she has been under since the public humiliation. “We are trying to convince her. If someone else committed the mistake, why should she be forced to sacrifice her career?” he said.

The Hindustan Gazette reported that Dr Parveen and her family have declined to speak publicly, but sources close to them confirmed that the incident has had a profound emotional impact on her.

What happened at the appointment ceremony

The incident occurred on Monday, December 17, at ‘Samvad’, the Chief Minister’s secretariat, during the distribution of appointment letters to over 1,000 AYUSH doctors. When Dr Parveen approached the stage wearing a hijab partially covering her face, Nitish Kumar was heard asking, “What is this?” On being told it was a hijab, he asked her to remove it—and then pulled it down himself, as seen in a viral video.

Deputy Chief Minister Samrat Chaudhary was visibly seen tugging at Kumar’s sleeve in an apparent attempt to stop him. Dr Parveen appeared visibly uncomfortable as laughter erupted from sections of the audience. She was subsequently handed the appointment letter again and ushered off the stage.

Media barred as fallout grows

In the aftermath, media entry was restricted at Nitish Kumar’s programme in Gaya on Wednesday, where he attended a two-day workshop organised by the Bihar Institute of Public Administration and Rural Development (BIPARD). The event was not live-streamed on the JD(U)’s official platforms, a notable departure from standard practice.

Media had also been barred a day earlier during the energy department’s appointment letter distribution programme, signalling an apparent attempt to contain public scrutiny amid rising outrage.

UP Minister’s defence sparks fresh controversy

The controversy further escalated after Uttar Pradesh Fisheries Minister Sanjay Nishad defended Nitish Kumar, stating that touching the hijab should not be made into an issue. His remarks drew sharp condemnation when he said, “What would have happened if he had touched somewhere else?”—a statement widely criticised as misogynistic and sexually suggestive.

Following backlash, Nishad released a video clarification claiming the Chief Minister’s intention was merely to ensure a clear photograph. He described his language as common rural expression from Purvanchal and denied any intent to insult women or Muslims, though he later said he withdrew his words if anyone felt hurt.

FIRs filed, political condemnation mounts

Police complaints have since been filed in Lucknow and Hyderabad, according to ANI and The Hindustan Gazette. Samajwadi Party spokesperson Sumaiya Rana, daughter of poet Munawwar Rana, lodged an FIR against both Nitish Kumar and Sanjay Nishad, calling the incident and the subsequent remarks a dangerous precedent. “This is harassment by someone holding a constitutional post,” Rana said, adding that such conduct emboldens others in positions of power.

SP MP Ikra Hasan condemned the act, stating that pulling a woman’s clothing or hijab is “wrong and dangerous” and sends a deeply disturbing message to society. “This is not about religion. Making a woman uncomfortable by touching her clothing is harassment,” she said.

According to the report of India Today, Congress demanded Nitish Kumar’s resignation, while the Rashtriya Janata Dal mocked the Chief Minister on social media, questioning his mental state and ideological shift.

Omar Abdullah: ‘Public humiliation cannot be justified’

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah strongly criticised Nitish Kumar, calling the incident “unacceptable” and reflective of a regressive mindset. Speaking to reporters in Srinagar, he said such actions echoed earlier instances of public humiliation of Muslim women.

“If the Chief Minister did not wish to hand over the appointment letter, he could have stepped aside. But humiliating a woman in public is completely wrong,” Omar said, as reported by Greater Kashmir, adding that the incident has exposed the erosion of the secular image Nitish Kumar once projected.

Women’s groups cite constitutional violations

Women’s rights groups and Muslim organisations have strongly condemned the incident. The National Federation of Girl Islamic Organisation (GIO) described the act as a “blatant violation of personal dignity and religious freedom,” demanding a public apology from the Chief Minister.

Hyderabad-based women’s rights activist Khalida Praveen, who filed a complaint against Kumar, stated that forcibly removing a Muslim woman’s veil violates Article 21 (right to dignity and privacy) and Article 25 (freedom of religion) of the Constitution, besides constituting an offence under criminal law.

Why the act raises criminal liability, not just political questions

It must be stressed that the Chief Minister’s conduct cannot be reduced to a moment of poor judgment or political controversy alone. The non-consensual act of physically pulling down a woman’s hijab in public, particularly by a person in authority, may attract criminal liability under laws meant to protect a woman’s dignity and bodily autonomy.

Under Section 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, assault or use of criminal force against a woman with intent to outrage, or with knowledge that such act is likely to outrage, her modesty is a punishable offence. Courts have clarified that “modesty” is not limited to sexual intent but includes acts that humiliate, violate privacy, or strip a woman of dignity, especially in public spaces.

The absence of consent and the clear power imbalance between a Chief Minister and a newly appointed woman doctor further aggravate the seriousness of the act. Consent cannot be presumed in a setting where a woman is placed under public scrutiny by the State itself, and visible discomfort, as captured on video, strengthens the argument that the act was inherently humiliating and foreseeable in its impact.

Beyond criminal law, the incident also implicates constitutional protections under Article 21, which guarantees dignity, privacy, and personal autonomy, and Article 25, which protects the freedom to practise religion. Legal complaints filed in multiple states argue that forcibly removing a Muslim woman’s hijab amounts to both gendered humiliation and interference with religious expression, making the incident not merely inappropriate—but potentially unlawful.

A chilling message from a constitutional office

As Dr Nusrat Parveen contemplates abandoning a government career she earned on merit, the incident has triggered a wider national debate on power, consent, gender, and religious freedom in state-controlled spaces.

What occurred on a public stage was not merely an individual lapse, but a reminder of how women—particularly from minority communities—remain vulnerable to humiliation even within the framework of the State itself.

Related:

Street Pressure, State Power, and the Criminalisation of Choice: How Hindutva groups are pushing Maharashtra’s anti-conversion law

Resignation in Protest: MP woman judge quits over elevation of senior she accused of harassment and discrimination

Extremists assaulted Muslim woman; hijab stripped of in broad daylight in Bengaluru and Muzaffarnagar

Three incidents of violence against Dalits since March 26, two against minors, one against elderly woman

The post When Power Forgets Consent: How a public act by the Bihar Chief Minister derailed a doctor’s career appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On the day, Ex-Muslims International, a coalition of ex-Muslim groups and activists, is calling on women to remove their hijab and for men to wear it as a humorous way of highlighting a serious violation of women’s rights.

Of course, adults who want to wear the hijab should be able to. (Child veiling is a different matter and nothing less than child abuse.) But it’s important to recognise that on a mass and global scale, innumerable women and girls are coerced into wearing it in order to comply with Islam’s modesty rules. Acquiescence to coercion or religious directives is not the same as choice. Until women are allowed to refuse or remove it, there is no real choice involved. Choice must be preceded at the very least by legal, social, and sexual equality for it to have any real meaning.

Algerian sociologist Marieme Helie Lucas says that the use of the word ‘choice’ regarding the wearing of the hijab is reminiscent of an old debate on

workers’ ‘freedom to work’ at the time of Britain’s industrialisation, i.e. a time when in order to not actually starve and die, workers’ only ‘free choice’ was to work 14 hours a day in hellish circumstances that also killed many of them, including women and children under the age of 10.

Islamists and the religious right always gift-wrap their rules as ‘choices’ and ‘rights’ to manufacture consent and legitimacy when they are not in power. When they are, their imperatives on women are always backed by threats of hell, shunning, violence, morality police, and even imprisonment and murder. The killing of Jina Mahsa Amini in Iran, which sparked the Woman, Life, Freedom revolution in 2022, is a clear example of the level of violence used by the religious right—and also the contestation of and resistance to it that exists there and everywhere.

To defend the hijab, apologists and Islamists even use the slogan ‘My Body, My Choice’, which came out of the feminist movement in the 1960s during the fight for abortion rights. A more accurate slogan would be ‘Woman’s Body, Man’s Choice’.

The call for men to don the hijab on No Hijab Day is to show that modesty is always the remit of women. How many times have we seen a woman in full burqa walking behind a man dressed in shorts and a T-shirt? This is because men will apparently not cause fitnah, or chaos, in society if they show their hair. Rivers will not run dry. Earthquakes will not follow from seeing men’s bare heads. And men certainly don’t fill hell; immodest and ungrateful women do. Hence why there is never a men’s modest clothing line sold at M&S and Dolce & Gabbana.

Modesty culture sexualises girls from a young age and puts the onus on them to protect themselves. In her 2005 book Bas les voiles! (Veils Off!), Chahdortt Djavann argues that the psychological damage done to girls from a very young age by making them responsible for men’s arousal is immense and builds fear and feelings of disgust for the female body. It also removes male accountability for violence, positioning men as predators unable to control their urges if faced with an unveiled or ‘improperly’ veiled girl or woman. It feeds into rape culture. Women are to be either protected or raped depending on how well they guard their modesty and the honour of their male guardians. Many an Islamist has absurdly argued that modesty is an important deterrent for society’s well-being: if unveiled women mix freely with men, women will lead men astray and will need to be stoned to death for adultery, so better to prevent such an outcome from the get-go by imposing modesty rules on women!

It is important to note that the hijab is the most visible symbol of a broader, all-encompassing system of sex apartheid that uses systematic violence and terror to oppress, persecute, and kill women in order to deny them equality and autonomy and exclude them in every field, including education, employment, health, the law, and the family and from public and political life. It means, for example, that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man’s, that she cannot travel or work or study without her male guardian, that she must use a separate entrance to access government buildings, that she must sit at the back of the bus… In Afghanistan, this system is so heinous that the International Criminal Court Prosecutor has announced this month that he will seek arrest warrants against Taliban leaders over the persecution of women and girls.

Diane Nash, a leader of the 1960s US Civil Rights Movement, once said:

Segregation was humiliating. Just the reality of signs that said you couldn’t use front doors or you couldn’t use this water fountain implied that you were subhuman… Every time I complied with a sign, I felt like I was acquiescing to my own inhumanity. I felt outraged and hated it.

Similarly, sex apartheid is humiliating and deems half the population subhuman. This is why a global campaign is calling for sex apartheid (also known as gender apartheid) to be considered a crime against humanity like racial apartheid.

Despite the cost to the lives of women and girls, criticism of the hijab is often labelled ‘Islamophobic’. But as Egyptian feminist Aliaa Magda El Mahdy has put it, ‘Hijab is sexism, not anti-racism’.

In a recent submission to the Women and Equalities Committee’s session around ‘Gendered Islamophobia’, Southall Black Sisters, One Law for All, and Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain stated:

The term Islamophobia…carries a problematic history. Anti-racists may use the term to refer to attacks on Muslims but the term Islamophobia has the effect of moving these experiences from an analysis of structural, systemic, and institutionalised racism to an irrational individualised fear or ‘phobia’ of Islam. It erases the connections with other forms of racism, which are often manifestations of exactly the same axis of power, violence, ideology and policies [thus shutting down much-needed conversations about women’s rights].

No Hijab Day’s theme this year is #HijabSilences (as a subversion of World Hijab Day’s theme #HijabisUnsilence), which speaks directly to the hijab’s role in erasing and silencing women and girls.

As the Ex-Muslims International statement says:

A symbol that has been used to shame, control, and suppress women cannot be used to combat intolerance and racism. A sexist tool to control and erase women is antithetical to women’s empowerment and visibility. Whilst anti-Muslim bigotry and xenophobia are undeniable, racism cannot be combatted with sexism and the hijab, rooted in modesty culture and oppression.

No Hijab Day stands in solidarity with women who resist… [and] calls for global recognition of the struggle against sex apartheid and the hijab and a commitment to supporting the fight for women’s freedom, equality, and rights.

How to take part in No Hijab Day

We are calling on women of all beliefs and backgrounds to take off their hijabs and put them on a man on 1 February. Men should also feel free to don a hijab in solidarity.

Use this opportunity to spark meaningful conversations about purity culture in Islam, challenge sex apartheid, and show your solidarity with ex-Muslim, Iranian, Afghan, and other women around the world who refuse to wear the hijab.

Share your thoughts, experiences, and support using #NoHijabDay and #HijabSilences.

Let your voice inspire real change for women’s rights.

Maryam Namazie is an Iranian-born campaigner, writer and Spokesperson of the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain and One Law for All. Author photograph: Emma Park.

Courtesy: The Freethinkers

The post Ex-Muslims observe ‘No Hijab Day’ appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Range Gowda, the Principal of Vidya Soudha College, revealed that the incident took place on March 6 after which the college authorities soon convened a meeting with the Muslim students and their parents. As per the report, the girls agreed not to wear the hijab again.

Gowda also stated that students who participated in the protest by wearing saffron shawls have been instructed to stop their demonstrations. As per a report by India Today, the Block Education Officer was unaware of the issue, and the Hassan Superintendent of Police is actively collecting information from the Education department.

In February 2022, the Basavaraj Bommai led BJP government in Karnataka had released a government order banning the hijab in government educational institutes. The move had seen widespread protests by Muslim students, who argued for their right to religion and education. As per report, the ban of hijab in classrooms led to over a 1000 Muslim girls dropping out of school during the incident. The government order had been challenged in the court with a petition. However, in March 2022, the Karnataka High Court ruled that the hijab is not an essential religious practice in Islam and thereby the ban was not impinging on the right to freedom of religion. The order was challenged by filing it further in the Supreme Court which finally delivered a split verdict on the issue and recommended it to be referred to a larger bench.

In December 2023, Congress’ Siddaramaiah had reportedly proposed after their electoral victory that they would be reversing the previous government ban on hijab in educational institutes, however, as of now, no such order has arrived. As per The Hindu, BJP’s R. Ashok said that the Congress government was making way for ‘religious identity politics in the classroom’. Similarly, a report by The Hindu has suggested that the chief minister has been made aware by the leaders at the Centre to not make decisions that may be ‘sensitive issues’ before the 2024 upcoming Lok Sabha elections and also as the case remains pending in the Supreme Court.

In recent news, the new BJP government in Rajasthan has also been dropping hints about bringing forth a ban on the hijab in government institutions. In January 2024, students in a school in Jodhpur were also reportedly called ‘chambal ke daaku’ after teachers turned away Muslim girl students who wore the hijab from entering the school. The students have claimed that they were harassed and have been threatened and that their marks would be deducted.

In a similar vein, BJP Agriculture minister Kirori Lal Meena had stated that the hijab is a ‘symbol of subjugation introduced by the Mughals.’ Meena also reportedly told the media that he will be discussing a ban on hijab with Chief Minister Bhajan Lal Sharma. The call for a hijab ban in schools was also supported by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Similarly, there were also reports that a committee was formed for drafting regulations to formulate a hijab ban in government schools in the state and has been seeking reports from other state on the topic.

Related:

Right to Education under attack: Are the Courts misguided in treating the hijab ban case as simply a religious issue?

It is a matter of choice, nothing more nothing less: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in Hijab Ban case

Needs and rights of Muslim girls ignored by administration: PUCL’s interim report on Hijab Ban in Karnataka

BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC

Rajasthan: Muslim teachers suspended for ‘love-jihad’, as students allege they were made to falsely testify

Rajasthan: Muslim students barred from school, called ‘Chambal ke Daaku’ for wearing hijab

The post Karnataka: Muslim girl asked to not wear hijab to school, after students protested wearing saffron shawls appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The incident took place on February 17 in Government High School Number 2 at Jodhpur’s Peepar. In a video released by Maktoob Media, students from the school can be seen stating that they have even been threatened by the school teachers and have faced severe conditions saying that they are “threatened and tortured every day”. ‘They threaten us that they will not give us marks.’ Students asserted their class teacher, a teacher named Priyanka, had made these statements in the school.

After the incident, parents of the students arrived at the school and spoke to the administration and asked for an explanation why their children were turned away. The parents of the schoolgirls claimed that teachers had behaved improperly towards the students. The parents also reportedly stated, “It is very unethical that you are threatening students of reducing their marks if they continue to wear hijab.”

However, the school principal asserted that the students were barred from school due to a violation of the dress code.

Meanwhile, the social media site X is filled with posts that are designating the parents of the students as ‘radicals.’ A video is making the rounds on social media where presumably the parents of the students are speaking to the police, seemingly agitated that the students are thrown out of school. Many seemingly anonymous accounts have shared the video on the website stating the parents are ‘threatening the school with violence’, or as ‘radicals’.

In a daring show of respect for secularism:#watch muslim parents threaten school administration with violence if their daughters are not allowed to attend school in Hijab

This is the power of Pasmandas in New Bharat.

Reportedly, from BJP ruled #Rajasthan. pic.twitter.com/aVFkqTftVE

— Ritu #जिष्णु (@RituRathaur) February 18, 2024

Some radicals are coming to the schools of Rajasthan & threatening the school administration that their children will come only in hijab, if school administration stops them they will punish the school administration pic.twitter.com/9IE1YegAQc

— Frontalforce (@FrontalForce) February 18, 2024

As anti-Muslim sentiment continues to be shared in schools with the hijab issue, BJP MLA Balmukund Acharya  visited Government Senior Secondary Girls School in the state during Republic Day celebrations on January 26 where videos from the event captured him stating that hijabs should not be allowed in schools. Going further, he took to the school’s stage and chanted slogans like “Bharat Mata Ki Jai” and “Saraswati Mata Ki Jai,”  and asked in a taunting manner, ‘whether some girls not chanting it were ‘asked not to.’

Following the incident, Muslim students reportedly filed a complaint at the police station an even organised a protest on the basis that Acharya’s statements disrupted the school atmosphere and demanding an apology. Similarly, BJP minister Kirori Lal Meena has chimed in and stated that, “Hijab is a symbol of slavery brought in by the Mughals.” He has detailed that he will talk to CM Bhajan Lal Sharma regarding the implementation of a ban on hijab. The demand for a dress code in schools been has found support by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad as well who are actively supporting it.

Related:

Rajasthan to implement hijab ban?

Muslim student denied to sit for UGC-NET due to hijab

1000s or hundreds of thousands, the Karnataka govt’s ill-motivated ‘Hijab ban’ has pushed Muslim girls out of school

Removing Hijab ban is a step forward, for gender justice & pluralism

The post Rajasthan: Muslim students barred from school, called ‘Chambal ke Daaku’ for wearing hijab appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The National Eligibility Test (NET) is an examination conducted by the University Grants Commission (UGC) and the National Testing Agency (NTA) for granting eligibility for the lecturers and research fellows at Indian colleges and universities.

Speaking to Maktoob, Yusuf claims to have arrived on time and well-prepared for the examination and furthermore, that she followed all UGC rules and guidelines. However, she alleges that teachers and supervisors at the centre denied her the opportunity to take the test, insisting that she remove her hijab, a religious headscarf worn by Muslim women.

Speaking to Maktoob, Yusuf stated that she had thoroughly reviewed the UGC’s website and the instructions on her admit card before reaching the examination centre and pointed out that nowhere did it state that observing hijab during the examination is prohibited, and instead there are instructions that those who wear religious headgear need to come early to the examination centre, “Nowhere does it state that observing hijab during the examination is prohibited. However, it did specify that individuals wearing religious markers/attire should arrive early for a comprehensive screening and checking process.”

Yusuf says that she was granted entry after being checked by a female guard, but however, a male teacher arrived and told her to remove the hijab before taking the test. According to the report, the male teacher was an official from the National Testing Agency (NTA). Yusuf said she tried to reason out and state the existing provisions for students with similar concerns in the guidelines, but she was not heard of. According to Maktoob, “I even tried to convince the officer, providing an example of how passport offices allow wearing hijab, even with screened ears for biometrics. However, he didn’t listen. I faced the dilemma of choosing between my religion and academic setback, and I opted for my faith over potential academic loss.” Yusuf further states that nobody was removed from the examination centre for a turban and believes that she was targeted due to her religion.

This is not the first instance of Muslim women students being denied entry to examination centres and classrooms for wearing the hijab. In 2018, the Delhi Minorities Commission (DMC) issued a notice to the University Grants Commission asking for an explanation after a student wearing a hijab was similarly denied the opportunity to write the UGC-NET exam. Similarly, on a much larger scale, women school students in Karnataka from the Muslim community were denied the right to enter schools because they wore the hijab in 2021. According to a report by Sabrang India, this incident led to about 1,010 hijab-wearing girls to discontinue their education in pre-university colleges in Karnataka, The timing of the ban had also coincided with final examinations which further worsened the situation for these students. These instances of discrimination thus fall into a pattern of the challenges faced by the Muslim minority. For instance, it was noted this year that there was a staggering 8% decline in the enrolment of Muslim students in higher education, which led to a decrease in 1,79,147 students.

 Related:

AISHE survey shows enrolment of Muslim students in higher studies falls significantly compared to other communities

MOE: Alarming dropout rates among SC, ST, and OBC students in premium institutes of India since 2018

Does the State have the right to disrupt Muslim woman’s right to education?

1000s or hundreds of thousands, the Karnataka govt’s ill-motivated ‘Hijab ban’ has pushed Muslim girls out of school

The post Muslim student denied to sit for UGC-NET due to hijab appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A report of the Hindustan Times provided that the above-mentioned announcement was made after a progress review meeting was held with Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah to discuss the issue of filling vacancies. Sudhakar clarified that the issue of hijab was not discussed in the said meeting and that candidates are allowed to wear hijab in NEET (National Eligibility cum Entrance Test) examinations as well. He said, “The hijab issue was not part of the discussion. Some want to raise objections to small things, but we cannot infringe on the rights of people. Even in NEET, candidates [are] allowed to wear hijab,” he said, according to the Wire.

As soon as the news surfaced, Hindutva groups threatened protests in the state. Nevertheless, in the face of the opposition, the State Education Minister stood strong and backed his decision. Speaking with IndiaToday, Sudhakar stated that “I think that the people who are protesting should verify the guidelines of the NEET exam. I don’t know why they are making an issue out of this…People are allowed to wear hijabs…”

In addition to this, Sudhakar also emphasized on an individual’s right to dress and stated “This is a secular country. People are free to dress however they want.” He also assured the students wearing hijab would be asked to appear at the exam centre at least one hour prior to the commencement of the exam.

The aforementioned stand taken by the Congress government in Karnataka can be a significant move in the positive direction. The hijab controversy had originally erupted in wake of a Government Order issued on February 5 by the previous BJP government in Karnataka. The GR was against the wearing of religion specific clothing in schools and pre-university colleges where a uniform has been prescribed. What followed was harassment of hijab-wearing girls on school and college campuses across the state.

Some were surrounded and heckled, others faced intimidation tactics by members and supporters of right-wing Hindutva groups. Some were even denied entry into educational institutions until they removed the traditional headscarf.

Notably, in March 2022, the Karnataka High Court had upheld the ban on hijab and had declared that hijab was not an essential part of religious practice. In October, the said High Court order was challenged in the Supreme Court. On October 13, 2022, a two-judge bench comprising Justices Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia had delivered a split judgment.  In view of the “divergence in opinion”, the apex court directed the matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate directions. which had resulted in a split verdict. The Supreme Court is yet to constitute a larger bench in the case.

Related:

1000s or hundreds of thousands, the Karnataka govt’s ill-motivated ‘Hijab ban’ has pushed Muslim girls out of school

Right to Education under attack: Are the Courts misguided in treating the hijab ban case as simply a religious issue?

It is a matter of choice, nothing more nothing less: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in Hijab Ban case

Justice Hemant Gupta’s take on secularism, fraternity and uniformity in the Hijab Ban case

Needs and rights of Muslim girls ignored by administration: PUCL’s interim report on Hijab Ban in Karnataka

The post Karnataka: Hijab-wearing candidates permitted to appear for recruitment examinations conducted by state appeared first on SabrangIndia.

A similar dispute occurred In early February 2022,  in the  state of Karnataka concerning school uniforms. The issue began when some Muslim students attending a junior college were denied entry because they wanted to wear hijab to classes. The college argued that this violated their uniform policy, which was also followed by students of other religions. In the weeks that followed, the dispute spread to other schools and colleges in the state, with Hindu students staging counter-protests and demanding to wear saffron scarves. On February 5, 2022, the Karnataka government issued an order stating that uniforms must be worn compulsorily where policies exist, with no exception allowed for the wearing of hijab. Subsequently, several educational institutions cited this order and denied entry to Muslim girls wearing the hijab.

The matter reached High court where court ruled  in favour of  government order on hijab ban in the schools 

On March 15, 2022, the Karnataka High Court upheld the ban on hijab by educational institutions, stating that it is not an essential religious practice in Islam and, therefore, not protected under Article 25 of the Constitution guaranteeing the right to practice one’s religion.

To arrive at this decision, the High Court conducted its own investigation by referring to The Holy Quran: Text, Translation, and Commentary by Abdullah Yusuf Ali, which was previously used by the Supreme Court of India in the Shayara Bano case 2017 9 SCC 1. According to Ali’s commentary, the Quran recommended hijab as a measure of social security to address cases of “molestation of innocent women” during the time of Jahiliya (pre-Islamic era) and not as a religious practice essential to the Islamic faith.

To read the judgement – https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/wp2347-2022-1337422.pdf

Later the issue went to Supreme Court where a split verdict was seen and the matter is yet to be heard by a larger bench of 5 judges.

Justice Dhulia stated that determining whether the hijab is an essential religious practice under Islam or not was not crucial for resolving the dispute. He firmly believed that if the belief is sincere and harmless to others, there should be no justifiable reason to ban hijab in a classroom. According to him, the petitioners were asserting their individual rights, not community rights.

Courts should not get involved in resolving theological questions, as there are multiple religious views on such matters. They must not interfere when constitutional boundaries are breached or unjustified restrictions are imposed.

Justice Dhulia disagreed with the Karnataka High Court’s flawed understanding that the petitioners couldn’t assert their fundamental rights in a public place like a classroom. He found it odd to compare a school with a war room, emphasizing that discipline should not come at the expense of dignity and freedom. Forcing a schoolgirl to remove her hijab at the school gate invaded her privacy and dignity, violating Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 of the Constitution. He stressed that the right to dignity and privacy was inherent and not derivative, referencing the Puttaswamy[i] judgment and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud’s observations on the link between privacy and human dignity.

Justice Gupta, on the contrary, upheld the Karnataka High Court’s perspective that the hijab did not constitute an essential religious practice. However, Justice Dhulia believed that the court should not have engaged in this debate at all, emphasizing that it should have first examined whether the restriction by the GO (Government Order) was valid or “hit” by the doctrine of proportionality. Justice Gupta argued that discipline was a crucial aspect of learning for students in schools, and going against rules would contradict the essence of discipline. While students had the right to education under Article 21, this did not grant them the right to insist on wearing additional religious attire as part of their uniform in a secular school. Furthermore, Justice Gupta emphasized that uniforms played a role in creating equality among students. Allowing one faith to wear specific religious symbols would undermine the principle of secularism, and the right to education remained accessible, leaving it to the student’s choice to avail it or not. He asserted that the freedom of expression under Article 19(a) did not extend to the headscarf, supporting the idea that the Karnataka GO(government order) promoted an equal environment. Anything worn by students under their shirts could not be deemed objectionable in terms of the issued GO(government order) Justice Gupta stressed that religion should have no significance in a secular school operated by the State, and promoting fraternity as a constitutional goal would be compromised if students were allowed to bring religious symbols into the classroom. He concluded that none of the fundamental rights were absolute and should be interpreted collectively as a whole.

To read the judgement – https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/75-resham-v-state-of-karnataka-15-mar-2022-412165.pdf

Impact of the issue in Karnataka

Following the High Court’s verdict upholding the hijab ban in government schools, numerous female students either faced rejection or chose not to appear for their class 10^th and 12^th board exams. In August 2022, six months after the ban was imposed, an RTI response disclosed that 145 out of 900 (16%) female Muslim students from government and aided colleges in Dakshina Kannada and Udupi districts, which were at the epicentre of the hijab controversy, obtained transfer certificates. Among these students, some enrolled in colleges where hijab was allowed, while others refrained from admission due to financial constraints in paying the college fees. The percentage of transfer certificates was higher in government colleges (34%) compared to aided colleges (8%).

A study published by the human rights body, People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL), indicated that the hijab ban exacerbated social divisions and instilled fear among Muslims in Karnataka.

The court’s failure to consider the downside is evident as it overlooks the fact that Muslim women are among the least educated communities in the country. The notion of positive discrimination, which allows for certain rights or practices to benefit a community’s education, seems to have been disregarded. This issue goes beyond the hijab or a mere piece of cloth; it is fundamentally about education. Incidents like these, on the rise, foster a sense of disaffection among the masses and contribute to their further isolation. To put a stop to such occurrences, the judicial responsibility must be carried out with utmost respect and sensitivity. In times of communal division, it becomes crucial to deliver judgments and implement policies that prioritize education and the development of communities, rather than contributing to their alienation.

[i]  https://frontline-thehindu-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/frontline.thehindu.com/news/understanding-the-split-verdict-on-hijab-ban/article66014782.ece/amp/?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16910933589231&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Ffrontline.thehindu.com%2Fnews%2Funderstanding-the-split-verdict-on-hijab-ban%2Farticle66014782.ece

https://m-thewire-in.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/m.thewire.in/article/rights/very-frightening-to-enter-campus-alone-muslim-students-recount-hijab-bans-impact/amp?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16910962964404&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fthewire.in%2Frights%2Fvery-frightening-to-enter-campus-alone-muslim-students-recount-hijab-bans-impact

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Karnataka_hijab_row#:~:text=After%20a%20hearing%20of%20about,essential%20religious%20practice%20in%20Islam.

https://www.verdictum.in/pdf_upload/wp2347-2022-1337422.pdf

The post How a protest and intervention diffused a crisis: ‘Hijab’ in Mumbai college appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Claim: Wearing a scarf/hijab means you are backward, uneducated

Busted: Wearing a scarf/hijab is a cultural choice not impacting theacademic or socio-cultural performance of women as Ilham’s top grades show

Over the past few days, the fact that Ilham, a young Muslim woman, who wears a colourful hijab, scored a stunning second rank in Karnataka’s Pre University Course (PUC) examination has inspired comment and even celebration. That she has a clear vision of becoming a clinical psychologist belies the hateful project that seeks to stigmatise and demonise Muslims.

This is a special delight for those Indians who have been appalled by the hijab controversy perpetrated in south Karnataka, ever since December 2021, stigmatising the wearing of the scarf within the classroom. The issue spiraled with controversial directives from the hardline Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) government in the state and worse, on March 15, the judgement of the High Court on the issue has invited criticism.

On June 18, as the Karnataka PUC results were being announced, both Anisha Mallya and Ilham, the first from the commerce stream and the second from science secured 595 and 597 marks respectively. Both students at second rank in the state did the St Aloysius PU College in Mangalore in Dakshina Karnataka proud.

Barely able to contain her excitement, a beaming Ilham told The Hindu, “I am very excited. I checked my percentage which was 91.5%. I informed my relatives. After some time, I started getting calls from my cousins saying my name is coming in the news. At that moment I realised that I got a rank. Till then I was unaware.” She has still not come to terms with the news, she says. Ilham’s parents are over the moon. Her father, Mohammed Rafiq, used to work in the Gulf as an IT employee and now is retired while her mother Moizatul Kubra is a housewife.

Ilham inspires. She told The Hindu, “Since my class 10 days, I developed a fascination towards the working of the brain. I want to pursue a career in clinical psychology.” The Internet has been overjoyed with Ilham’s success. Many shared her success story and pointed out that her religious identity did not deter her from securing a top rank.

PS: Amongst other things, she also wears a Hijab and that should be not be a reason for the State or vigilantes to harass her. Only if our courts could say this. 

The MLA of Kalburgi North constituency of Karnataka, Kaneez Fatima, had rolled out a tweet congratulating Ilham. She wrote, “Hijab is not a barrier for education. Congratulations to Ilham for securing 2nd rank in Karnataka state PUC examinations.”

Related:

Hate Buster: No protocol regarding National Song; standing up not mandatory
Hate Buster: Mob protesting Nupur Sharma’s anti-Prophet comments did not kill Kolkata policeman
Hate Buster: Conspiracy theories about Taj Mahal collapse, yet again
Hate Buster: Nope! Eating from Muslim-owned restaurants does not cause impotence

The post Why Ilham’s rank and vision challenge the project of hate appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In a bid to reject the ‘Macaulay system of education’ in India, Vice-President M. Venkaiah Naidu on March 19, 2022, indicated that he felt that there was nothing wrong with the saffronisation of education. His statement comes at a time when Karnataka colleges are bereft with a controversy regarding the use of hijabs inside classrooms.

Speaking at the inaugural event of the South Asian Institute of Peace and Reconciliation at the Dev Sanskriti Vishwa Vidyalaya in Haridwar, Uttarakhand, Naidu said that India must give up on its “colonial mindset”. According to The Hindu, he said, “We are accused of saffronising education, but then what is wrong with saffron?”

Citing ancient Indian universities of Nalanda and Taxila and ideals like Sarve Bhawantu Sukhinah (all be happy) and Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (the world is one family), he said that “Indianisation” of the education system is central to India’s new National Education Policy 2020. It may be noted that the All India Forum for Right to Education (AIFRTE) has repeatedly opposed this policy since its inception despite Covid-19 restrictions.

In previous protests, the AIFRTE pointed out that the homogenisation and centralisation process of the policy are antithetical to the progress of mother tongues, regional languages and knowledge diversity; in stark contrast to Naidu’s assurance that the policy empowers local languages.

However, in the context of India’s current political environment, Naidu’s speech raises the question of why Karnataka girl students were refused their right to a hijab if the central government is willing to let education be influenced by Hindu religion.

Similarly, the Hindustan Times on March 21, reported that the Karnataka government will set up a committee to decide on inclusion of Hindu holy text Bhagavad Gita in school syllabus. According to officials, this is as per the policy guidelines and in line with the syllabus in Gujarat.

Yet when Muslim girls approached the Karnataka High Court, the same leniency was not shown for their right to wear hijabs if they chose to. While addressing the case, two of the key questions that needed to be seen together were the essentialism of hijab in Islamic faith and girls’ rights to freedom of expression and privacy. However, the court only considered the former and refused to strike down the state government’s ban on hijab.

Considering fundamental rights were dismissed in this case, it is worth considering if the government should be pushing an education policy that has received as many as 51 objections from the AIFRTE for reasons varying from inequality to corporate gain.

Related:

BREAKING: Wearing of Hijab not essential religious practice: Karnataka HC
Walkouts, objections, after Karnataka HC verdict on Hijab, but BJP netas hail it
51 Reasons to say goodbye to NEP 2020: AIFRTE
Hijab row: Udupi girls dubbed terrorists by BJP leader

The post Saffronisation of education is okay, but hijabs are out? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Another hijab controversy unfolds in Karnataka when a College Principal in Vijayapura district banned a large group of hijab-wearing students from entering the premises on February 16, 2022.

As the Karnataka High Court continues to hear petitions regarding the wearing of hijabs by students inside educational institutions, government PU college in Vijayapura disallowed hijab-wearing students from entering classrooms citing interim orders. As per the document, schools and colleges can resume provided no student wears any form of religious clothing in classrooms.

However, the enraged students said authorities had not informed them about this decision in WhatsApp groups.

#Hijab wearing students is having a standoff with college principal in #Vijayapura #Karnataka over allowing them inside classes. They argue no message came in college #WhatsApp group about no hijab.Principal says- he is following HC order.They have exams 2day #KarnatakaHijabRow pic.twitter.com/Q8DRhvQRWG

— Imran Khan (@KeypadGuerilla) February 16, 2022

According to NDTV, the students were initially stopped at the entrance but the girls forced their way through. Eventually, they were allowed a separate space inside the college to take off their hijabs and burqas, and attend lectures.

Since February 15 when the latest court hearing took place, social media has been flooded with reports of students, teachers and staff alike being forced to publicly take off their hijab. In some cases, women are also forced to take off their burqas.

IT WAS NEVER ABOUT THE UNIFORM: Muslim teachers and staff being publicly humiliated to remove their #hijab before entering school campus.#KarnatakaHijabRow pic.twitter.com/T99Xp5VHTK

— Mohammed Zubair (@zoo_bear) February 14, 2022

However, the more gruesome development in recent days has been the censure of hijab within schools as well. After PU and degree students, young middle school and high school girls are nowadays being forced to assert their constitutional rights in front of authorities.

In Shimoga, a young girl was turned away from her school for wearing a hijab on February 15. Shockingly, she was chased/ followed in a sprint, not by school authorities, but a local reporter. The reporter then proceeded to record the child. Meanwhile, the girl can be seen in the video, visibly scared of a full-grown man following her with a phone camera.

School kid with Hijab is being followed/Chased by a “REPORTER” in Karnataka.Muslims are being humiliated and hounded on daily basis. It’s disturbing to see this very disturbing as a citizen of India and fellow Muslim.?#KarnatakaHijabRow pic.twitter.com/G9VD7KfOW2

— Mister J. (@Angryoldman_J) February 15, 2022

The incident garnered severe criticism from social media.

Someone put it right!

Vulture Journalism#KarnatakaHijabRow #HijabisOurRight pic.twitter.com/7meF8GTGzq

— Undefeated_Faith (@Shaad_Bajpe) February 15, 2022

However, with every passing hour such horrors only continue in the state. In another district of Chikkamagaluru the Mudigere Girls High School banned hijab wearing school girls from entering the place. The group of schoolgirls were previously allowed to wear the garb inside the place. However, local reports said police personnel instructed the Principal to make the hijabi students sit outside the school. This despite the fact that courts have not given any order regarding schools.

A school in Mudigere where initially the students were allowed to wear scarf but then the police dept entered the school and forcefully made the principal to make the students remain outside of the school gate.#KarnatakaHijabRow pic.twitter.com/hkdo14jXja

— Undefeated_Faith (@Shaad_Bajpe) February 15, 2022

Similarly, on Tuesday, a school in Nellihudikeri village of Kodagu district asked students to take off their hijab before entering schools. However, the girls refused to take off their scarves and marched out of the school as a sign of protest.

“I will not remove my Hijab” : a student says as she walks out of her school campus in Kodagu’s NelliHudikeri. Second day now that these girls are turning up to school with #Hijab & requesting management to allow them who refuse citing HC orders. #KarnatakaHijabRow pic.twitter.com/QWfc0a2Ryj

— Deepak Bopanna (@dpkBopanna) February 15, 2022

Worrying ascent in the Hate Pyramid

The targeted exclusion of hijab from educational institutions is another example of communal hate that fits neatly into the concept of a Hate Pyramid introduced by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) Secretary Teesta Setalvad. The Pyramid explains how minute biases and prejudices like looking down on one’s appearance, mannerisms, method of praying has the capacity to consume us within a society.

“It is these bias attitudes of stereotyping, insensitive remarks, fear of differences, non-inclusive language, micro aggressions justifying biases by seeking out like-minded people, that takes shape in the form of hate,” said Setalvad.

A prejudiced attitude – that is well prevalent in Indian society – is only the first stage in the pyramid. Howver, the continued exclusion of students from educational institutions jumps to the third stage of “Discrimination” that includes educational discrimination and harassment. This stage has already spread to other states like Madhya Pradesh and Pondicherry.

Moreover, Karnataka even entered the fourth stage of the pyramid “Violence” when student protests turned violent with right-wing elements wreaking havoc. This fact is worrying in terms of internal national peace because the next and final stage of this pyramid is “Genocide” – the deliberate, systematic extermination of an entire people.

As such, the recent incidents regarding the Hijab controversy must be seen with this prevalent bias in mind.

Related:

Karnataka govt’s ominous silence at the communal mobilisation of students
CJP’s Hate Hatao Campaign: A half-yearly report
To wear or not to wear the Hijab is not the point!
Two more hijab controversies in Karnataka
Hate as a State project is not a new phenomenon: Survivors
Karnataka Veil Issue: Should Muslims Choose the Veil Over Education?

The post Hijab controversy now hits schools! appeared first on SabrangIndia.