A piece of clothing that should ideally be a matter of freedom of choice and expression, has sadly been heavily politicised, nationally and internationally. You! takes a look...
A piece of clothing that should ideally be a matter of freedom of choice and expression, has sadly been heavily politicised, nationally and internationally. You! takes a look...
Just a few days into employment at a Karachi-based software house, a female employee was asked to either stop wearing her hijab at work or leave. The reason given was that her wearing the hijab would spoil the company’s image as an ‘all-embracing’ workplace.
The story surfaced the internet in a Facebook post and was later covered in the news media. It was reported that the company’s CEO had defended the discriminatory policy in a meeting with the affected employee; and pushed her to resign rather than make the demand in writing. The woman claimed that the CEO even went on to recommend her two Islamic banks as possible alternatives; and warned against considering legal options. This news went viral on social media and drew sharp criticism. It was after this that the CEO confirmed the incident, and issued an apology along with his resignation. The victim was also asked to resume her job, but she refused the offer and moved on.
Incidentally, the head covering scarf also became the focus of another news around the same time, although in a different city and in a different circumstance. News circulated yet again on social media that Punjab Civil Secretariat in Lahore was not allowing women to enter the Minister’s Block without having their heads covered. A video emerged where the security personnel could be heard saying that the instructions were from the Punjab Minister for primary and secondary healthcare, Dr Yasmin Rashid herself. However, denying the allegation, the minister responded by saying that it was “quite absurd indeed”. The guard who made that claim had been issued a show-cause notice and is being investigated. Both instances are examples of where a certain dress code is either imposed or denied against the will of a woman.
“I think both are wrong ways,” says Sehrish Azhar, a motivational speaker and blogger from Lahore, who wears a hijab. “Nobody should ask someone to take it off or to take it on. This can’t be imposed unless it is at a sacred place like a mosque, maybe then there can be a condition applied to take it on”.
There have been several incidences reported in the international media where the hijab-wearing women have been called racial slurs and derogatory comments, whether they were natives or immigrants. In recent years, the number of hate crimes has gone up and Muslim women have been verbally harassed, beaten and even pushed in front of oncoming trains. The Islamophobic rage worsens for them when they wear a full-faced veil, or a niqab, as they are easily identifiable from afar.
While in Pakistan, where there is no restriction by the state on wearing or not wearing the headscarf, both sides of the issue garner support from conservative and feminist circles alike, in terms of freedom of choice. However, it has been more of a hot debate in the rest of the world, as ‘a piece of clothing that should ideally be an issue of freedom of choice and expression but has been heavily politicised’. It remains a polarising issue across the globe where some enforce this dress code on women and some states fine women for wearing it.
Last year, Australian senator Pauline Hanson wore a burqa to parliament as part of her campaign to ban the all-enveloping garment, drawing a quick rebuke from the government and Muslims. The niqab has been banned in France, Denmark, a Swiss canton and surprisingly even in the Muslim Algeria, with some women fined for publicly wearing the garment. The UN Human Rights Committee has also criticised France ‘burqa ban’, saying the law ‘violated’ the rights of women. Moreover, it called for women who were fined for wearing full-face veils in public to be compensated. It remains unconvinced by France’s claim that the ban was necessary for security and social reasons.
“If a non-Muslim state denounces or bans the dress code of any of its minorities, it would be downright persecution,” says Dr. Shehzad Saleem, Vice President of Al-Mawrid, a foundation for Islamic research and education. “This is because the dress code of a minority is a sphere that belongs to basic human rights.”
Iran, a Muslim state, has also come under criticism for human rights violations against women, based on a reason entirely different from that of the few European countries. Women’s dress has come under increasing scrutiny in the country since the 1979 revolution, when adherence to an Islamic dress code became compulsory. The dress code dictates that women’s hair and body must be covered in public and ‘morality police’ launch regular crackdowns on those who are not fully respecting these rules.
Early this year, an Iranian woman who removed her head scarf on a Tehran street was sentenced to two years in prison. Amnesty International, a London-based non-governmental organisation on human rights, reiterated its calls on Iranian authorities to “end the persecution of women who speak out against compulsory veiling, and abolish this discriminatory and humiliating practice”. In Saudi Arabia, another prominent Islamic state, women are required to wear an abaya, a long black cloak that covers all, with some women also wearing the niqab. The Saudi dress code is mostly seen as a symbol of oppression in the West. However, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said earlier this year that women in Saudi Arabia do not need to wear traditional black abayas or headscarves. A woman must have a choice what to wear and what not to wear, whether living in a Muslim or a non-Muslim country. “Men have zero clue of what it’s like to be forced to cover – what it does to your confidence, your self esteem, your will to choose for yourself,” argues Humeira Kazmi, a US-based Pakistani author and blogger who does not cover her head. “They or anyone should not be allowed to make that choice for someone else. Freedom to choose works for women who want to cover the same way. Leave them alone too,” says Kazmi.
During the early days of General Zia-ul-Haq’s regime, which is known not only for military dictatorship but also for a massive Islamisation move, newscasters on state television were asked to cover their heads. Mehtab Rashidi, now a politician, famously rejected this dictation and preferred to leave from her position as a newscaster.
Another predicament faced by women is in the field of sports. A woman given the freedom of choice to cover her head while participating in sports, won accolades. Other sportswomen lost on more than one occasion without even participating, when not given that freedom of choice. Case in point, when India’s ace shooter Heena Sidhu refused to wear the hijab for competing in an Airgun competition in Iran two years ago. This year, Woman Grandmaster and former world junior girls’ champion Soumya Swaminathan - another Indian, also refused to participate in the Asian Team Chess Championship held in Iran, because of the compulsory-headscarf rule in the country which she said violated her personal rights. On the other hand, we have Nargis Hameedullah, Pakistan’s first female karate player to win a medal - bronze, at the Asian games in Indonesia. Nargis, the 19-year-old national karate champion for the past five years, wears a hijab.
Each society has its own sets of values and moral standards, but no standard is a reason for enforcement. The choice to wear or what not to wear should remain with the member of society, man or woman.
The writer is a broadcast journalist and freelance writer. She has keen interest in issues concerning women, religion and foreign affairs. She can be contacted at shamahf2@gmail.com
