British teachers warn of crisis over Muslim girl's uniform fight

Anushka Asthana:

School rules on the uniforms children wear could be thrown into chaos this week by the final law lords judgment in the case of Shabina Begum, the Muslim girl who was banned from wearing full Islamic dress at school.

Headteachers have told The Observer that if the judgment goes in her favour, making it unlawful to exclude children for refusing on religious grounds to wear proper uniform, it would 'undermine the authority of schools'.

Denbigh High School in Luton, whose case is now supported by the Department for Education, originally sent Begum home because she insisted on wearing a jilbab, or full-length Islamic gown. Begum, now 17, stopped going to school in 2002 and spent two years at home, before enrolling into another one that allowed her to wear the gown.

John Dunford, leader of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: 'We are very concerned. If the judgment goes against the school, this will undermine the authority of schools across the country.' The Muslim headteacher at Denbigh High had carefully negotiated the uniform policy with the local community, including imams. 'If even after that the school's authority can be questioned, then I think that is a worrying situation.'

Lawyers for Begum, whose case has been led by Cherie Booth, the Prime Minister's wife, say the teenager was a victim of prejudice and the school's decision denied her a right to an education. Although the school allowed girls to wear a shalwar chamise - trousers and a tunic - with a headscarf, it was not enough to meet her religious requirements. Booth stressed the fact that Begum was not under pressure from her family: 'Shabina made her own decision,' she said.

The school has argued that the jilbab was not part of the uniform and that it had to avoid creating a 'two-tier system of religious observance'. It said its decision was to protect the rights of the majority of pupils not to wear the jilbab.

Begum initially lost the case against the school, but the decision was overturned at the Court of Appeal. It is that decision that is now being challenged by the school, the local education authority and the government. 'The Court of Appeal judgment said the school had lost sight of the individual child,' said Jack Rabinowicz, a partner at TSS Law and an expert in education law. 'It said there had been no appreciation of the depth of feeling the child had for her religion.'

The solicitor representing Begum said that in England, unlike France, schools can show religious affiliation, so there should be no ban on religious dress. If the law lords ruled against Begum, that would mean 'some children who do have orthodox beliefs would find themselves unable to attend local school', said Julia Thomas, the solicitor from the Children's Legal Centre, a charity that promotes children's rights. She argued it was a question of modesty: 'It might not be what I want or what you want, but if she is allowed to wear a headscarf, I don't see why it is a big issue that she wanted to cover her legs. The trousers in the shalwar chamise were too tight - this is a dispute over 11 inches of hem.'

She rejected the school's argument that it would single out Muslims because there were already different choices of dress. She said that Begum had once said: 'Why is it in a free country I have to fight to wear a dress?' The team are prepared to take the case to Europe if they lose.

If Begum wins, it could lead to more cases of children questioning school rules as going against their human rights. Rabinowicz said he had been approached by a Sikh parent who wanted his son to go to a Catholic school, but it would admit only Catholic children.

'He says it is denying his human right to go to the school because he is a non-believer. We live in a multicultural, multiracial society, and the problem is how do you square that with headteachers maintaining discipline through things like uniform policies.' Other examples could be a Rastafarian child arguing the right to wear dreadlocks, or a child cross-dressing.

Where modesty stops and madness begins

NOW WE'RE TAKING OUR TOLERANCE TO EXTREMES

So Shabina, what’s the point of Britain?