Post by satnamkaurkhalsa on Jul 1, 2004 19:01:06 GMT
Forwarded on behalf of Harmander Singh SIE
Dear recipents,
Please forward to as many as you can with haste.
SIE asks for the official response from the Sikh leaders who said this will never happen by Monday 12th July 2004 or their resignation by Friday 16th July 2004 for being complacent. This gives the Sikh leaders a minimum of two weeks to decide.
For the record, SIE does NOT believe paragraph 67 or any other similar meaningless undertakingss or safeguards (that are nothing less than an esteemed pile of steaming verbiage) are going to protect the minorities wanting to preserve their honour or identity.
For this reason alone, SIE would urge all Sikhs to vote NO to any initiative bringing Britain closer to Europe.
In the meantime, tell your MP and MEP how you feel about the decision.
Court backs headscarf ban.
Banning Muslim headscarves in state schools does not violate freedom of religion and is a valid way to counter Islamic fundamentalism, the European Court of Human Rights said yesterday. It rejected an appeal by a Turkish student barred from attending medical school because of her headscarf. Reuters. Strasbourg.
The Guardian 30 June 2004 page 13
FULL STORY
Europe court upholds ban on Muslim headscarves
Appeal by a Turkish woman is thrown out
STRASBOURG - Banning Muslim headscarves in state schools does not violate the freedom of religion and is a valid way to counter Islamic fundamentalism, the European Court of Human Rights said yesterday.
In what could be a precedent-setting decision, the Strasbourg-based court rejected an appeal by a Turkish woman who was barred from attending Istanbul University medical school because her headscarf violated the official dress code.
The court decision, which takes precedence over national court rulings, could help the French government face court cases it expects to be filed in September against a headscarf ban that it plans to impose in state high schools.
The decision could also affect cases in Germany, where Muslim teachers are appealing against laws in several states barring them from covering their heads.
'Measures taken in universities to prevent certain fundamentalist religious movements from pressuring students who do not practise the religion in question or those belonging to another religion can be justified,' the ruling said.
Bans issued in the name of the separation of Church and state could therefore be considered 'necessary in a democratic society', said the court, which is part of the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe whose members include Turkey.
The influential Union of French Islamic Organisations denounced the ruling as politicised justice and said Muslims would consider it a form of persecution.
In the case before the court, Ms Leyla Sahin was blocked from sitting exams in 1998 and later refused entry into the faculty. She said the ban and her later exclusion from class violated her freedom of religion.
The court also considered a similar case filed by former nursing college student Zeynep Tekin, but discarded it because the plaintiff had withdrawn earlier.
In their unanimous judgement, the seven judges said headscarf bans were appropriate when issued to protect the secular nature of the state, especially against extremist demands.
'The court has not overlooked the fact that there are extremist political movements in Turkey that are trying to impose on the whole of society their religious symbols and their idea of a society based on religious rules,' they wrote.
Turkey, a majority- Muslim society, argued before the court that headscarves violated the secular nature of its state. -- Reuters, AFP
Dear recipents,
Please forward to as many as you can with haste.
SIE asks for the official response from the Sikh leaders who said this will never happen by Monday 12th July 2004 or their resignation by Friday 16th July 2004 for being complacent. This gives the Sikh leaders a minimum of two weeks to decide.
For the record, SIE does NOT believe paragraph 67 or any other similar meaningless undertakingss or safeguards (that are nothing less than an esteemed pile of steaming verbiage) are going to protect the minorities wanting to preserve their honour or identity.
For this reason alone, SIE would urge all Sikhs to vote NO to any initiative bringing Britain closer to Europe.
In the meantime, tell your MP and MEP how you feel about the decision.
Court backs headscarf ban.
Banning Muslim headscarves in state schools does not violate freedom of religion and is a valid way to counter Islamic fundamentalism, the European Court of Human Rights said yesterday. It rejected an appeal by a Turkish student barred from attending medical school because of her headscarf. Reuters. Strasbourg.
The Guardian 30 June 2004 page 13
FULL STORY
Europe court upholds ban on Muslim headscarves
Appeal by a Turkish woman is thrown out
STRASBOURG - Banning Muslim headscarves in state schools does not violate the freedom of religion and is a valid way to counter Islamic fundamentalism, the European Court of Human Rights said yesterday.
In what could be a precedent-setting decision, the Strasbourg-based court rejected an appeal by a Turkish woman who was barred from attending Istanbul University medical school because her headscarf violated the official dress code.
The court decision, which takes precedence over national court rulings, could help the French government face court cases it expects to be filed in September against a headscarf ban that it plans to impose in state high schools.
The decision could also affect cases in Germany, where Muslim teachers are appealing against laws in several states barring them from covering their heads.
'Measures taken in universities to prevent certain fundamentalist religious movements from pressuring students who do not practise the religion in question or those belonging to another religion can be justified,' the ruling said.
Bans issued in the name of the separation of Church and state could therefore be considered 'necessary in a democratic society', said the court, which is part of the Strasbourg-based Council of Europe whose members include Turkey.
The influential Union of French Islamic Organisations denounced the ruling as politicised justice and said Muslims would consider it a form of persecution.
In the case before the court, Ms Leyla Sahin was blocked from sitting exams in 1998 and later refused entry into the faculty. She said the ban and her later exclusion from class violated her freedom of religion.
The court also considered a similar case filed by former nursing college student Zeynep Tekin, but discarded it because the plaintiff had withdrawn earlier.
In their unanimous judgement, the seven judges said headscarf bans were appropriate when issued to protect the secular nature of the state, especially against extremist demands.
'The court has not overlooked the fact that there are extremist political movements in Turkey that are trying to impose on the whole of society their religious symbols and their idea of a society based on religious rules,' they wrote.
Turkey, a majority- Muslim society, argued before the court that headscarves violated the secular nature of its state. -- Reuters, AFP