|
(New York, November 16,
2005) The
European Court of Human Rights decision to uphold the Turkish
government’s headscarf ban will deny thousands of women access to
higher education and a professional life in Turkey, said Human
Rights Watch today.
Last Thursday, the
court’s Grand Chamber rejected the appeal of Leyla Şahin, who had
hoped to qualify as a medical doctor in Turkey, but was banned
from medical school after she refused to remove her headscarf. She
was ultimately forced to study abroad.
“Turkey’s ban on headscarves clearly infringes the right to
religious practice and expression,” said Holly Cartner, Europe and
Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The European Court
has let down thousands of women who will be prevented from
studying in Turkey’s universities.”
The Turkish government has sporadically enforced a ban on
headscarves for students and teachers in universities since the
1960s. However, in 1997, implementation of the ban intensified
when the Turkish Army compelled the government to implement the
ban without exception. Since that time, women who wear the
headscarf are barred from state employment, taking up elected
posts in parliament, appearing as lawyers in court, working as
teachers in private schools and universities and, in some cases,
even from venturing onto state property. Thousands of women are
now barred from higher education in Turkey each year because of
the headscarf ban.
The court’s decision darkens the prospect for scores of other
victims of the ban who have petitioned the European Court of Human
Rights. For thousands of Turkish women currently banned from
universities and public employment, the ruling ends any hope that
they might restart their education and careers.
The current government of the religiously oriented Justice and
Development Party (AKP) would like to lift the ban on headscarves,
but does not dare to defy the military on such a sensitive issue.
If the court had upheld Şahin’s complaint, the Turkish government
might have been able to ease restrictions. Instead, for the
foreseeable future, Turkish women like Şahin will either have to
go abroad to study and practice or forego professional life in
Turkey.
At the heart of the decision was the Grand Chamber’s opinion that
the ban was reasonable if it protected the “rights and freedoms of
others,” and its ready acceptance of the Turkish government’s
claim that women who do not wear the scarf might be accused of
being irreligious. The Grand Chamber also ruled that the ban was
justified because it protected the secular status of universities
in a country where there were “extremist political movements.”
“The court readily accepted the Turkish government’s arguments,
but gave little weight to the severe restrictions of rights for
Şahin and women like her,” said Cartner.
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Françoise Tulkens of Belgium
questioned the general and abstract appeal to secularism, and
doubted that the ban was proportionate. She noted that the
government had produced no concrete examples of women who wear
headscarves trying to intimidate women who do not wear the
headscarf. Human Rights Watch is not aware of such a pattern of
intimidation, and has noted in past reports that women who wear
the headscarf have been able to study side-by-side with women who
do not cover their heads without disturbance on Turkish campuses
for 10 years. Furthermore, while there are certainly extremist
political movements in Turkey, the campaign for the right to wear
a headscarf has been entirely nonviolent for more than a quarter
of a century.
Tulkens sharply dismissed the assumption that the headscarf
intrinsically conflicts with principles of equality. She also
observed that women in Turkey have no choice about whether or not
to study in a “secular university.” All universities, private and
state alike, are subject to the government ban. Women have to
choose whether to remove their headscarf in violation of their
religious beliefs and sense of personal modesty, or resign
themselves to a life without higher education or career prospects.
“The ECtHR has been a powerful force in extending basic freedoms
in Turkey, but it missed an important opportunity in this case to
stand firmly behind principles of freedom of religion, expression,
and non-discrimination,” said Cartner. “Thankfully, Judge Tulkens’
analysis presents the beginning of an argument for greater
tolerance that we hope will prevail in the long term.”
Related Material
Memorandum to the Turkish Government on Human Rights Watch’s
Concerns with Regard to Academic Freedom in Higher Education, and
Access to Higher Education for Women who Wear the Headscarf
Background Briefing, June 29, 2004
From:
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/11/16/turkey12038.htm
© Copyright 2003, Human Rights
Watch 350 Fifth Avenue, 34th Floor
New York, NY 10118-3299 USA
|
Update: