The case comes amid a growing row over the wearing of niqabs and burkas in schools and colleges as well as in the court room.
An alliance of Islamic groups and Left-wing activists have been accused of conspiring to put pressure on institutions to overturn existing bans on the wearing of full-face coverings.
In a London courtroom tomorrow, lawyers acting for a 22-year-old Muslim woman will argue her right to religious freedom will be breached if Judge Peter Murphy orders her to remove her veil.
Chris Grayling, the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, is understood to be monitoring the case closely, while senior figures in his ministry firmly believe “it is in the interests of justice for a jury to see the face of the accused”.
The woman’s lawyers are likely to bring an action against the court for breach of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights if the judge rules her trial - for intimidating a witness - should go ahead in November with her face visible to the court.
Article 9, enshrined in British law through the Human Rights Act, guarantees “freedom of conscience, thought and religion”.
The woman’s case has received backing from Liberty, the civil rights campaign group, which has supported the defendant through earlier hearings. » | Robert Mendick, Chief reporter | Sunday, September 15, 2013
My comment:
Wearing the full-face veil is not an article of the Islamic faith. Islam teaches that women should be dressed modestly at all times. Covering one’s face is not necessary in order to be modest. The full Islamic veil is culture-bound, not religion-bound. So the judge need not bellyache over this one. – © Mark
