CC BY
13
2016.11.002. V. AVKSENTYEV, B. AKSYUMOV, V. VASILCHENKO. CONFLICT AROUND HIJABS: RELIGION OR POLITICS? //
"Nauka Yuga Rossii" [Science of Southern Russia] ("Bulletin of the Southern Research Center"), Rostov-on-Don, 2016, vol. 12, No 1, P. 65-74.
Keywords: secularism, religiosity, religious freedom, state-confessional relations, religious policy, the North Caucasus.
V. Avksentyev,
Institute of Socio-Economic
and Humanities Research SSC RAS
B. Aksyumov, V. Vasilchenko,
North Caucasus University
The authors address the problem of interaction between the religious and the secular aspects of the society life. On the basis of the analysis of a particular conflict in the North Caucasus, which has been continuing with varying intensity since October 2012, there may be identified new trends in relations between Islamic leaders and the countries which proclaimed secularism as one of the leading principles. We are talking about the conflict in the village of Kara-Nogay Tube in the Stavropol Territory.
Currently, there has emerged some growth of tension in the state and confessional sphere. The Stavropol Territory found itself on the front line of the problems of state-confessional relations in Russia. On the one hand, the measures intended to meeting the interests of the Moslem community are increasingly causing concern among the Russian population, opposition politicians, including representatives of nationalist organizations, try misuse these fears, speaking about the danger of de-Russification of the Territory. On the other hand, in the Moslem community rumors about alleged cases of harassment of Moslems in the Stavropol Territory are being spread. Problems in interfaith relations are largely due to the lack of a conceptual
document defining the principles and mechanisms of state-confessional relations. In conceptual terms the principle of the secular nature of the state and the role of authorities of various levels in its provision have not been clearly defined up to the present, neither the bases and mechanisms to support traditional religions; the interaction of secular and religious leaders; attitude towards new religious movements. Alarm signs warn about not only new challenges, but also the long-standing defects of religious policy: lack of systematization, indistinct understanding of the goals and objectives of the religious policy by the people responsible for the state-confessional relations, finally, the absence in the public mind of prevailing ideals of hierarchy and values that form the Russian identity. The situation is quite contradictory. On the one hand, the state is not the monopolist on the ideological market and ideological pluralism is proclaimed. On the other hand, the secular nature of state does not mean that the possibility of demonstrating religious affiliation, especially religious propaganda should have no restrictions. Numerous conflicts over hijabs, in particular, the conflict that occurred in the village school of Kara-Tyube, Stavropol Territory, highlight the problem clearly.
In the autumn of 2012 in the Stavropol Territory, in the village of Kara-Tube, Neftekumsk district, which is a part of the area of the Nogai residence, a conflict broke out between the parents of five Moslem schoolgirls and the school administration. The matter for it was that the administration prohibited Moslem girls to come to school wearing hijabs. The parents saw it as a violation of the constitutional rights of the children and filed lawsuit against the director of the school. The Prosecutor's Office and the Government of the Stavropol Territory did not consider the actions of the school administration illegal. In order to ensure the secular nature of education, the Government of the Stavropol Territory on October 31, 2012 approved the "Basic Requirements for School Dress and Appearance of Students in State Educational Institutions of the
Stavropol Territory and Municipal Educational Institutions of Municipal Formations of the Stavropol Territory". Paragraph 2 of Article 9 of the document prohibits wearing in educational institutions of religious clothing, clothing with religious paraphernalia and (or) religious symbols. About ten schoolgirls who did not agree with the new requirements, excluding the possibility of wearing hijabs at school, have switched to alternative forms of education.
The events in the Nogai village led to a public debate. Some officials and public figures expressed their support for the decision of the Stavropol authorities banning hijabs in schools, others met such a decision with bewilderment or outrage. The proponents of hijabs focused on the alleged violation of the Constitution, human rights and freedom of religion, and their opponents underlined the fact that Russia is a secular state where religion cannot claim interference with the educational process.
The arguments of both sides have their own logic, especially because currently there is no standard practice of settling such contradictions - the Russian legislation gives no definitive indications that would prohibit or allow wearing of religious paraphernalia in educational institutions. The situation became the subject of consideration at the courts. The district court rejected the lawsuit which demanded cancellation of the local authority ban on wearing hijabs in schools. Later the Russian Supreme Court of July 10, 2013 upheld the decision of the Stavropol Territory Government which approved the policy on school uniforms. However, this verdict was not the end the dispute. After the court hearing the plaintiffs' lawyer claimed politicization of the decisions and infringement of the religious rights of Moslems and the possibility to address to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).
Subsequent events showed that the problem of hijabs in schools had not been removed from the agenda. Conflicts on this issue are arising again and again. In particular, the Government of the Republic of Mordovia in 2014 approved the requirements
to the clothes and appearance of pupils, prohibiting students wearing headgear. Moslems felt infringement in this case too. The conflict became resonant and reached the Supreme Court, which confirmed its position - a ban on hijabs in the schools of Mordovia was declared legal. Representatives of Moslem organizations expressed their wish to appeal the decision, including, if necessary, at the European Court of Human Rights.
The issue of wearing hijabs and other religious paraphernalia causes public and political debate in many countries. In most EU countries there is no legislative decision to ban wearing hijabs, but there is no sustained social consensus on the issue either. The degree of bans is most uncompromising in France, which has positioned itself as a essentially atheistic state. In general, the problem of hijabs is not solved definitely and regularly provokes conflicts. For example, in 2009, in Belgium the directors of 700 provincial schools in the province of Flanders prohibited Moslem schoolgirls to attend classes wearing Islamic headscarves. Earlier, a similar ban was introduced at two schools in Antwerp and Hoboken, but it has caused an angry reaction of Moslem schoolgirls and their families. One of the girls even filed a lawsuit. To date, the restrictions on wearing hijabs in Belgium are significantly mitigated. In Europe, as well as in Russia, there appeared the tendency to regard a hijab not as a piece of Moslem women's clothing, but as a symbol of political aspirations of the Moslem community.
The lack of uniformity in interpretation of the norms of freedom of conscience and religion in relation to the educational process forces to refer to the conceptual basis of the problem. The right to the freedom of thought, conscience and religion is enshrined in Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Literally, it is repeated in paragraph 1 of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. At the same time the rights and freedoms should not be taken as absolute and unlimited ones. Paragraph 2 of Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states
that exercising their rights and freedoms of a person may be subject to statutory restrictions in order to ensure recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. In a state of law the imposed bans are the result of a consensus among the citizens, the result of a social contract, reflected in the law.
The presence of such limits of the rights confirms the practice of application of the European Convention on Human Rights. The peculiarity of the Convention as compared with other international documents on human rights is the presence of a controlling authority - the European Court of Human Rights. In 2005, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), supported the ban on headscarves in universities established by the Turkish authorities, since this restriction was not directed against the applicant's religious beliefs but pursued the legitimate aim of protecting the rights and freedoms of others and maintaining public order. The obvious purpose of the restriction, according to the Court, was to preserve the secular nature of educational institutions. In 2006, the ECHR confirmed its position, rejecting the complaint of applicants from Turkey of the ban on wearing Islamic headscarves in secondary schools. The Court stated that the right to education is not absolute and may be subject to limitations. School requirements for clothing are the general rules that apply to all students regardless of their religious beliefs and pursue the legitimate aim of preserving the neutral nature of secondary education.
Islamic politicians' actions concerning the admissibility of the presence of certain religious practices and symbols in educational process usually have a distinct political overtone. This is evidenced by tough confrontation on the question how to wear religious clothing in Islamic countries. Long-term debate in Egypt regarding wearing of niqab, show that religious precepts can be used by different political groups as a tool of political pressure. For example, the decision to ban niqab in university
dormitories, adopted in 1979 by A. Sadat, the predecessor of Mubarak as president of Egypt, was the reaction to the active performance of the Islamists after conclusion of the Camp David Accords with Israel.
It is significant that in Turkey, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and other countries with total predominance of Moslem population headscarves are either prohibited or not mandatory. For example, the Kuwait Constitutional Court allowed two women-MPs not to wear the traditional Moslem head covering (hijab). In the summer of 2015, after a long debate, which took place at the government level, hijabs were banned in the schools of Kyrgyzstan. Moreover, the authorities' concern is not hijab by itself but the increasing political influence of the radical Islam. These facts show that the problem of hijabs in Russia and Europe is of more political than religious nature. Through promotion and protection of their religious symbols Islamist groups try to achieve not realization of human rights and freedom for religious expression but political and cultural influence in the socio-cultural environment where they are not in the majority.
The integration of Moslem communities in the European socio-cultural space is connected with many difficulties. The descendants of the first immigrants are often more radical, more fanatical in the matters of faith, than the preceding generations. The Russian state must avoid the mistakes in the interaction with the Moslem community, which could contribute to the cultural and civilizational isolation of Moslems in a number of European countries. The issue of hijabs in the official institutions of the Russian Federation in this context becomes crucial, it is the touchstone, which tests the strength of not only the firmness of the secular nature of the state, but also the strategic course for achievement of national unity, formation of supra-ethnic and non-denominational integrating identities.
The ban on the use of religious paraphernalia in educational institutions does not infringe human rights,
emphasize the researchers. Its purpose is to remove from the public space the symbols which stimulate splitting of the society, to eliminate the differences hindering social integration. Russian society needs a consensus that would ensure stable development in the conditions of transformation processes and public peace. One of the foundations of this consensus is the secular nature of Russia as a state, in particular, the secular nature of education in public schools and colleges.
The author of the abstract - E. Dmitrieva.
