Niqab ban: UKIP emulate France in search for votes

Issues Explained

Saturday, 23 January 2010

The UK Independence Party (UKIP) is the first political party in Britain that has now openly called for the banning of the niqab in public life. It has gone one step further than the (British National Party) BNP which believes the niqab should be banned from schools. Lord Pearson of Rannoch, a former Conservative peer, who is the leader of UKIP spoke of banning it in private buildings as well as public ones. This follows in the same vein as France which at present has banned the hijab in schools and some public buildings and is also proposing a ban on the niqab in public life. Lord Rannoch went on to claim that the niqab was not compatible with Britain's values of freedom and democracy. He claimed it could be a threat to security if terrorists chose to wear it to hide their identity. And finally he claimed it was a threat to gender equality. Varied reasons have been presented as to why the niqab should be banned but what is clear from this latest assault on the face veil are the following: Firstly, such provocative statements coincide with an upcoming general election and jumping on the latest bandwagon to win votes is key. UKIP's tactics are not that dissimilar from government minister Jack Straw's comments about the niqab some years back at a time when it first became fashionable to be seen to be taking a hard line stance on the Muslim community. This was to curry favour with the right-wing and anti-Muslim sectors of the electorate. Secondly, secular capitalist politics - French, Swiss (minaret ban), German, British or any other style has repeatedly revealed its true colours - that it has no qualms in stigmatising, and whipping up frenzy and hysteria about its minorities or playing on irrational fears regarding Islam and Muslims in order to bag a few extra votes. This is regardless of the prejudice, discrimination and abuses their actions fuel against ordinary Muslims within their societies or upon community relations. In this assault on the niqab by western politicians of various nationalities, there is a common thread. This is the cut-throat nature of secular politics where the well-being minorities is clearly acceptable collateral damage in order to secure political interests and personal political ranking. So while certain political parties in Britain now play catch-up to Frances's treatment of its Muslim community, Muslim women in Britain, Europe and across the world realise more than ever that Western freedoms within secular states are in truth not universal values but only secured for those who follow the secular path. Furthermore they understand that the idea that a democratic system can guarantee their rights is a farce. Muslim women realise that when it comes to securing their basic rights as citizens of a state, only the implementation of Allah's (swt) laws in the Muslim world via the Khilafah system can achieve this and protect their dignity. Within the Islamic political system, career politicians have no place. It is a system where politics, the role of government and the function of political parties is about sincerely taking care of the real needs of citizens such as addressing poverty, lack of access to education and healthcare, eradicating corruption, ensuring accountable governance and establishing true security for all its citizens. It is a system that does not pander to discrimination to win votes or play one sector of society against another for political mileage. Sultana Parvin Deputy Women's Media Representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain Add this Article to your Bookmark site Set as favorite Bookmark Email this Trackback(0)  TrackBack URI for this entry Comments (5) Subscribe to this comment's feed Nombz: ... Once again, its only a vocal minority (1900 women out of 5,000,000 muslims) who wear the niqab! i don't think a vast minority hold the right to tell a sovereign country how it should formulate its laws! If you're in Rome, do what the Romans do. 1 report abuse vote down vote up March 01, 2010 - 16:37:51 Votes: +0 Jay Smith: ... H Khan Thanks for your words of encouragement. I thought no one was interested in what I had to say. Do you (or anyone that reads these comments) remember a time when Sikh men wanted to join the Metropolitan Police Service? There was a problem of practicality regarding the wearing of the “potent” religious Sikh turban together with the Police hat. This problem wasn’t resolved by dragging it through the tabloid press, whipping up media hysteria about the problem of multiculturalism and talks of banning the Sikh Turban. The problem was resolved through dialogue and understanding between the Sikh men concerned and the police. The Police exhibited a high degree of culturally sensitivity. The Sikh men reached a mutual agreement with the police. The agreement was that the Sikhs could keep their turbans and stick the police badge right bang smack in the middle of that Turban. It was also agreed by both parties that the colour of the turban could and should be in line with the police’s uniform. PROBLEM SOLVED, no fuss there. Muslim women who where Niqaab are more than happy to reveal their identities at airports, banks and for other security issues within reason. Muslim women who wear Niqaab are more than willing to take on board security concerns and other practicalities. The issues raised concerning Niqaab can easily be worked through and resolved – "WITHOUT THE TABLOID PRESS". The point I am making is that if the Niqaab was part of Sikhism, Judaism, Christianity or any other religion accept Islam there would be complete tolerance towards it. For example, Catholic women have been wearing head gear since time immemorial, there were never complaints about it. Muslim women started to wear something similar to it and there’s a massive problem with it. So ladies and gentlemen, the British public aren’t concerned about the so called “repression” of Muslim women or their well being. The issue here is not about security, practicality or segregation it’s all about Islamaphobia. Hope I wasn’t too long winded. Once again thanx for your kind words H Khan, you inspired all this in me. 2 report abuse vote down vote up January 26, 2010 - 23:17:41 Votes: -1 H Khan: ... @ Jay Smith: ... Spot on..! 3 report abuse vote down vote up January 26, 2010 - 11:29:42 Votes: +0 samir sheikh: ... why are the british copying the french by getting after the niqab. When will the muslimah be left alone. 4 report abuse vote down vote up January 25, 2010 - 20:30:42 Votes: +2 Jay Smith: ... The Freedom of Hypocrisy If men are allowed to dress as women, change their gender and pornography is widely acceptable in society why can't Muslim women wear an extra piece of cloth for the sake of pious modesty? If people are allowed to wear balaclavas, hoods, hoodies and hats in the cold climate of Europe whilst in public why can't Muslim women wear an extra piece of cloth for the sake of pious modesty? Let’s remember, the people in the West were demonstrating in 2008 against religious repression in Tibet during the run up to the Olympic Games in Beijing. If that’s the case then how could religious repression be such a populist vote winner in the UK with the same British public? Why don’t these same people stage similar demonstrations against the religious repression that is happening at home in the UK like they did for Tibet (which is thousands of miles away)? Freedom and democracy appears to breed moral and ethical inconsistencies. Freedom and democracy appears to breed a consistency in racism, nationalism, prejudice and intolerance towards any political rival to Western International Primacy. The public were demonstrating for the freedom of religion in order to beat of their political rival the Chinese while the British public are more than happy to suppress those very same religious freedoms in order to beat of another political rival – POLITICAL ISLAM. Politicians can see the contradiction but the public is probably too blind to see the same contradiction. Such moral ambivalence is hypocrisy and appears to run in the veins of so called “freedom loving people” in the West. Here is a new addition to the many freedoms of the West: “The Freedom of Hypocrisy”. Maybe that’s not so new, they’ve always been hypocrites. 5 report abuse vote down vote up January 25, 2010 - 17:41:37 Votes: +4 Write comment  Show/hide comment form Name Email Comment smaller | bigger I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage. Add Comment