France Secularism

France being a century old secular state, has the right to expect its citizens to abide by it, regardless of their religion and the duties that correspond with their faith.

The following is an essay which reflects the French government's current position regarding the prohibition of headscarf use by young Muslim women in schools. It will discuss the government's position on the new legislation in relation to issues such as human rights, secularism, anti-Semitism and sexual equality. It will also discuss the reaction to this current issue from those in the French Muslim community who support the legislation, to those who are against the legislation.

In 1905, the French government established laws which prevented the state from recognising or funding any religion . The concept of these laws is commonly referred to by the French term laпcitй, a principle which defines the separation of church and state. These laws were passed to safeguard the new French democracy from any political influence, such as the Catholic Church, which was a strong political force opposed to the establishment of a secular democracy . As Christopher Caldwell states, the Catholic Church not only influenced politics but also controlled primary education . It is not surprising then that in the tradition of maintaining a secular state, 69% of the French population were in favour of the law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools (law 2004-228).

On March 15 2004, law 2004-228 was signed into law by President Jacques Chirac, and came into effect on September 2 2004 at the beginning of the school year . The new law prohibits primary and secondary students from wearing any conspicuous religious symbols or attire. This includes yarmulkes (skullcaps) worn by Jewish men, large crosses worn by Christians, turbans worn by Sikh men and hijab (headscarves) worn by Muslim women. It has sparked some controversy among members of the Muslim community, which is approximately 5 million strong, constituting 8.3 % of France's population . Many Muslims believed the measure's primary focus was on the hijab and protested against the new legislation feeling that their rights were being violated.

On 17 January 2004, prior to the passing of the legislation, thousands of people marched in cities around Europe and North America to protest against the French government's decision to prohibit Muslim headscarves in schools. Up to 10,000 people rallied in France. One of the protesters in Paris, Betayeba Hayet exclaimed "We live in a country which is supposed to defend human rights and to practise one's religion is a human right" . However, this view shared by many of the French Muslim community contradicts another view i.e. a large majority (78%) of French Muslims who believe that laпcitй actually supports religious freedom. In fact, an abundant minority of Muslims actually requested and embraced the new law, many of whom were young women. Justin Vaпsse argues that,

'The French Muslim community includes a fringe of Islamist militants... taking advantage of the growing number of Muslims... to "test" the French Republic, demanding privileges that other religions do not have and trying to rewrite some of the long-established rules of French society .'

This coincides with President Chirac's view that the law was passed in response to a rise in Islamic fundamentalism , for the hijab is not only a form of modest dress but rather a symbol of Islamist militancy. Hence, anti-Semitism and violence committed by Muslim youths has increased in the past four years .

On July 18 2004, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon urged all 600,000 French Jews to leave France immediately to escape what he dubbed as "the spread of the wildest anti-Semitism" . He was mainly referring to the 127 acts of anti-Semitism committed in 2003. A further 135 anti-Semitic acts were committed

in the first half of 2004 alone . Ten days later, Sharon welcomed the first 200 immigrants to arrive in Israel. A survey of French Jews conducted by The Israel Project found that 26 % were considering emigration due to rising anti-Semitism in France . While France is home to the largest Jewish population in Europe, they are still largely outnumbered by the Muslim community in terms of population. However, anti-Semitism cannot be attributed to Muslim people alone. For it was Neo-Nazis that were responsible for the desecration of Jewish and Muslim graves in Lyon, August 2004 . It should also be noted that the banning of the hijab is not solely based on the current issue of anti-Semitism but also sexual equality.

The French feminist group Ni Putes Ni Soumises (Neither Whores Nor Submissives) and other local associations argue that young Muslim women are greatly pressured into wearing a veil or hijab by their families, in particular their fathers and brothers. They see these young women's otherwise immodest dress not only as a sign of western depravity, but also making them vulnerable as sexual objects, susceptible to gang rape . Thus, many Muslim women fighting to take the hijab off defend the law, because it frees them from the burden of having to hide themselves during the day . The laпcitй principle ensures sexual equality, hence preventing young women from wearing the hijab. In contrast, the principle is also one aimed at religious neutrality, intended to create individual freedom of religion . However, it is only a minority of the Muslim community who feel that laпcitй does not wholly support religious due to the prohibition of hijab use in public schools. One Muslim leader implied devout Muslim women need not feel sinful for not abiding by the Islamic laws of modest dress.

The grand Sheik Muhammed Sayed Tantawi of Al Azhar University, the most prestigious centre of Sunni Islamic learning, did not feel that the French government's new law violated the rights of Muslims in any way. He said non-Muslim countries were free to impose bans like the one proposed by President Chirac because,

'That is their right, which I cannot interfere with as a Muslim... If a Muslim woman observes the laws of a non-Muslim state, then from the point of view of Islamic law, she has the status of acting under coercion... Just as I do not allow non-Muslims to interfere in my affairs as a Muslim, at the same time I do not permit myself to interfere in the affairs