Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali has provided a useful analysis of this week’s Crown Court decision to permit a Muslim woman to stand trial wearing a full-face veil.
The woman, who has been charged with intimidating a witness, argued that requiring her to remove the niqab in public would breach her human rights.
Permission
Judge Peter Murphy, sitting at London's Blackfriars Crown Court, ruled that she was permitted to wear the veil during trial though she must remove it when giving evidence.
He said: “In general, the defendant is free to wear the niqab during trial.
“If the defendant gives evidence she must remove the niqab throughout her evidence.
“The court may use its inherent powers to do what it can to alleviate any discomfort, for example by allowing the use of screens or allowing her to give evidence by live link.”
Security
Commenting on the ruling, Bishop Nazir-Ali said:
“Any decision made by society must be based on objective criteria which have to do with maximising freedom and maintaining fairness, justice and good order for all. It seems to me that there are a number of such criteria which would restrict or prevent the full-face veil or the niqab being worn in public places.
“Paramount is, of course, the need for security. There have been a number of cases, worldwide, where criminals or terrorists have escaped arrest wearing a burqa. More often, there is a need to identify people for security reasons and not only at immigration booths.
“Those dealing with our security, need to be able to tell, by people’s behaviour in public places, including facial expressions etc, whether they are any danger to others. Schools and colleges in particular, will want to be very sure of the identity of those in their buildings so that they can protect children and young people from those who may to wish to harm them. Again, this must go beyond the checking of identity at the entrance but will extend to the rest of the premises during the course of the day.”
Read the full feature in the Telegraph >
Sources: