Religious Veil Poses Courtroom Conundrum

Judge Peter Murphy at Blackfriars Crown Court in London has allowed a Muslim woman to make a plea in court whilst wearing a face-covering niqab. But should she be allowed to do so during her full trial?

The UK has taken a liberal stance on religious freedom as underpinned by the European Convention on Human Rights. This means that if your religion dictates that you dress in a certain way you cannot be told by the state to change your appearance.

So why is Judge Peter Murphy deliberating on whether a Muslim woman should be able to wear a niqab during her full trial?

Coming to a compromise

The issue is one of security and maintaining the law – reasons for which the convention says that the state may legitimately enforce the removal of religious dress.

During the plea, both judge and defendant were able to come to a compromise. The defendant was allowed to continue wearing the niqab because a female police officer was present at court who had witnessed the defendant being photographed whilst in custody.

In a closed room, the defendant briefly removed her niqab in front of this officer, who was then able to verify the identity of the defendant under oath. In this way, both security and the law were upheld.  

Why the full trial is different

During her full trial, the defendant will be in front of a jury; the concern is whether the niqab, by preventing the jury from observing the defendant’s facial expressions, will impact on their ability to make a properly-informed decision.

Judge Peter Murphy will give his decision on Monday. If he rules against the defendant, the case may be transferred to a higher court.  

Blog

• Catalonia - arrest warrants issued for deposed government members
• Clifford Chance’s SPARK Scheme: How can it help you to secure a training contract early on?
• Gender pay gap at the top - women paid around £12,000 less
• Robert Mugabe resigns after a 37 year rule
• "The Gender Pay Gap Is A Continuing Reality"