In the Netherlands, Tom Zwart, a professor of intercultural law at Utrecht University, used the word “hypocrisy” to characterize the situation in his country. The Dutch government bans face coverings, with the exception of “health and safety,” but Zwart says he is on fragile ground. According to the 2005 Law on the Prohibition of Disguise in Certain Cases, participants in the demonstration are prohibited from covering their faces in whole or in part in such a way as to make identification more difficult. This prohibition applies only if there are disturbances to public order during demonstrations or if there is an imminent risk of such disturbances. The ban does not apply to face covering for religious reasons. It also does not apply if participants have the right (under Chapter 2 a § Ordnungsgesetz) to cover their face in whole or in part. [28] “This is a big contradiction,” said Alia Jafar, a British teacher in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, about the many face covering laws that differ from country to country — particularly because, to avoid allegations of discrimination, the legal wording of most burqa bans is often more neutral to apply to men and women who hide their faces. In addition, the law stipulates that anyone who disobeys a police order to remove a mask can be sentenced to six months in prison and a fine of HK$10,000. Color is also included in the definition of “face covering.” The law came into force at midnight on 5 September. October until further notice, and Hong Kong`s Supreme Court refused to rule out a preliminary injunction, but the court will later decide whether to allow judicial review of the appeal of the Emergency Regulations Order. [46] [47] “Masks are not available,” Zwart said. “The Prime Minister even said you should make one yourself, use a scarf or something else.
So if you have a burqa or face veil, why not use it to protect yourself and others from the coronavirus? You are doing exactly what you have been told. Now, she said, she has noticed a slight public change as others cover their faces. “Since the outbreak, there has been no one who has insulted me on the street,” Rahmani said. “And I used to be insulted every day. People usually look at me angrily, but I saw a change in their eyes. I can only hope that after all this, we can get together and talk about their experiences with face veils, which are now everywhere. “Today`s decision opens up old wounds, broadens the principle of legal inequality and sends a clear signal of exclusion to the Muslim minority,” the group wrote. By simultaneously imposing masks for safety reasons while banning other face coverings, he said with a laugh that large sections of the population are currently unknowingly violating the law, even if they are following the government`s new advice. Wearing a mask at gatherings in a public place is illegal in Denmark. [18] Section 134b of the Danish Criminal Code, inserted with effect from 3 June 2000, punishes the offence with a fine or imprisonment of up to six months. Section 134b, Part 2, also criminalizes the possession of effects that must be considered intended to be concealed in an assembly.
§ 134 b, part 3, exempt from punitive masking, which is carried out to protect the face from the weather. [17] The prohibition does not apply to Greenland or the Faroe Islands. [17] It is illegal for a person over the age of 16, with the intention of concealing his or her identity, to wear a mask, hood or any other device in which a significant part of the face is covered or covered in order to conceal the identity of the wearer, to be or appear in a public place. or on private property in this Commonwealth without the prior written consent of the landlord or tenant. Violation of the provisions of this article is a Class 6 crime. In the Netherlands, citizens are now required to wear masks on trains and buses. But last year, a law went into effect banning the wearing of face coverings on public transport, hospitals and schools. Parliament passed a new law on May 16, 2017 that stipulates that people wearing clothing that covers their face, such as burqas, niqabs, full-face helmets or scarves (motorcyclists), etc., face fines of 150 euros (about US$167) in places such as universities, public transport or courts. The measure came into force in October 2017. [13] [14] Shortly after its adoption on October 1, 2017, there were incidents in which individuals were wrongly fined by the police, prompting some commentators to point out gaps in the law or a misconception of them by the police. [14] When contacted, several human rights lawyers described the situation in France as “ridiculous.” Still, it`s not unique.
Many European countries now require the wearing of face masks, although at the same time they ban face coverings. This sentiment took on a new irony at the start of the coronavirus pandemic in 2020, when the France made it mandatory to wear masks in public spaces while banning Muslim face coverings. Hiding faces in public is legal in Norway, except when you attend a public event. The researchers found that in Switzerland, at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full face coverings. About 5 percent of Switzerland`s population of 8.6 million are Muslims, the BBC reported. Satvinder Juss, a London lawyer and human rights expert, said burqa wearers in Europe are now legally on “much firmer ground” given recently published health guidelines regarding face coverings. It is not a crime to cover one`s face in the following situations: in Italy, a 1975 law strictly prohibits the wearing of clothes that could hide a person`s face. Penalties (fines and imprisonment) are provided for such behaviour. The original purpose of the anti-mask law was to prevent crime or terrorism. The law allows exceptions for a “just cause,” which has sometimes been interpreted by courts to include religious grounds for wearing the veil, but others – including local governments – disagree, saying religion is not a “just cause” in this context.
[21] Anti-mask or anti-mask laws are legislative or criminal initiatives that prohibit the veil of the face in public. Anti-mask laws vary widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction in terms of intent, scope, and penalties. Since 1 October 2017, a ban on face coverings has been in force throughout Austria. Among other things, the anti-face veil law aims to allow interpersonal communication, which is necessary for peaceful coexistence in a democratic and constitutional state. The law applies to all persons residing in Austria. Researchers attribute the France`s focus on Muslim headgear and the women who wear them to the country`s imperial past in North Africa and the Middle East – particularly algeria. As face coverings quickly become the norm to slow the spread of the novel coronavirus, which is visible everywhere on city streets and on public transport, the global politics surrounding it is more complicated than ever – a reflection not only of this current crisis, but also of broader values and stereotypes. “Face masks are now seen as a social measure to protect people, but the niqab is still treated as an antisocial act,” said Asima Majid, a British Muslim who currently wears a hijab (the Muslim headscarf) but has worn a face veil in the past. She contacted other Muslim women via WhatsApp to ask them about their experiences.
In 2014, Mr Juss represented a 24-year-old French Muslim who appeared before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of S.A.S. appealed against the France against the France`s ban on wearing a face covering. While the Court rejected the France`s arguments in favor of the ban on grounds of public safety (as well as the protection of human dignity and gender equality), it ultimately upheld the ban and accepted the vague goal of “living together.” This justification asserts that a hidden side inhibits the right of citizens to socialize and coexist easily. The French ban on face coverings is an act of Parliament passed by the French Senate on September 14, 2010 that leads to a ban on the wearing of face covering head coverings, including masks, helmets, hoods, niqābs and other face covering veils, in public places, except in certain circumstances. One, Maryam (she asked to use only her first name), told the Times that she felt “personally attacked” by the bans.