Told you so.... (*)
The proposed French law banning "Muslimwear" in public schools is doomed by a "semantic pitfall":
Aiming at religious signs, France eyes bandanas, too
Elaine Sciolino/NYT
Wednesday, January 21, 2004
PARIS The proposed French law prohibiting the wearing of religious symbols in public schools was initially interpreted to include Islamic head scarves, Jewish yarmulkes and large Christian crosses. Those were the three items singled out last month in a speech by President Jacques Chirac and in a report by a blue-ribbon commission on religion and the state.
Then the issue of the turban worn by Sikhs was raised, as France's tiny Sikh community protested that its boys would quit school before removing their turbans.
On Tuesday, Luc Ferry, minister of national education, went further. He told the National Assembly's legal affairs committee that any girl's bandana that is considered a religious sign, as opposed to a fashion statement, presumably, would also be banned.
During the two-hour debate on the proposed ban, lawmakers wanted to know why the draft law was worded to ban "ostensibly" religious symbols and not everything that is "visible." Ferry explained that the wording afforded the state the ability to broadly interpret what constitutes a religious symbol and prevent the possible subversion of the law. That's where the bandana came in.
"If we had chosen the word 'visible,' we could have seen the appearance of other signs," Ferry said. For that reason, he explained, "The bandana, if it is presented by young girls as a religious sign, will be forbidden." He also warned that hairstyles or the wearing of certain colors could be a source of manipulation. "Signs could be invented using simple hairiness or a color," he said. "Creativity is infinite in this regard."
In his testimony, Xavier Darcos, the deputy minister, agreed.
"It's a question of our will to produce a clear, useful and general text that avoids diverse precedents and individual improvisation," he said. "It was quite necessary to act and not to restrain religious freedom."
Last April, Ferry, a philosopher and political scientist by education, came out publicly against proposals emanating from the Parliament to pass a law banning religious symbols in schools, saying it could be judged unconstitutional. On Tuesday, he called the Muslim veil "a militant sign that calls for militant countersigns." By contrast, the turbans worn by Sikhs, if they were to remain "discreet," would be allowed, he said.
Neither man gave a definition of what constitutes a religious bandana, how teachers would decide what was an "ostensible" sign of religion, or how the new law would be implemented.
Asked to define a bandana, an official assigned to deal with news media inquiries in the ministry, said, "There is no definition. It will be left to the discretion of the heads of schools." The Larousse dictionary defines a bandana as "a small cotton square of lively colors, usually worn as a scarf." Asked about bandanas, Catherine Colonna, Chirac's spokesman, said, "The future law must not allow people to bypass it the way certain individuals and groups already seem certain to do." She stressed that dialogue between school administrators and students would be required before punitive steps are taken.
In an interview in Tuesday's issue of the popular tabloid Le Parisien, Mohamed Bechary, president of the National Federation of Muslims of France, a large Muslim organization, asked, "Who will define what is ostensible and what is not?" He said he recommended "the discreet wearing of the scarf be it a bandana, a cap or a hat." Other leaders of local Muslim communities in France have also advised female students to find ways around the ban by wearing a head covering that could be interpreted as a fashion statement rather than a symbol of Islam.
Despite the existence for a national curriculum for all French public schools, there is no national dress code. It is left up to the discretion of each school to decide whether to allow such displays as body piercing, baseball caps, visible thongs or spaghetti straps, for example.
As for religious symbols, since 1992 the wearing of head scarves has been allowed only if it is not "aggressive or proselytizing." But individual school directors decide. In its current draft form, the law states that in public schools, "Signs and dress that ostensibly show the religious affiliation of students are forbidden." Many school administrators oppose a legal ban on religious symbols, arguing that it is impossible to enforce and will only create even more divisiveness.
The proposed bandana ban has added to their frustration. "I think it's truly ridiculous. We have gotten into this logic, and I don't know where it's going to lead us," said Gerard Aschieri, secretary general of the union FSU, which represents 46.6 percent of unionized education personnel in France.
As fashion, bandanas in France have tended to follow the American lead. Traditionally red and white or blue and white print and a symbol of the American West, they became an accessory among rap musicians and in street culture some years ago.
Although some ready-to-wear designers have used bandanas in their shows over the years, such common street fashion has not been on display in the current haute couture shows in Paris. The long-haired fashion designer John Galliano, however, wears a signature bandana tied pirate-style at the back of his neck.
iht.com
(*) Message 19702436
Re: Ferry explained that the wording afforded the state the ability to broadly interpret what constitutes a religious symbol and prevent the possible subversion of the law. That's where the bandana came in.
Contrariwise, the wording will afford Muslim plaintiffs the ability to narrowly interpret what constitutes a religious symbol and mitigate the application of the law. That's where the bandana will come in. |
