By IRNA,
London : Amnesty International has condemned an overwhelming vote by the lower house of the Belgian parliament in favour of legislation banning the wearing of full-face veils in public.
“The Belgian move to ban full-face veils, the first in Europe, sets a dangerous precedent,” warned John Dalhuisen, Amnesty’s expert on discrimination in Europe.
“A complete ban on the covering of the face would violate the rights to freedom of expression and religion of those women who wear the burqa or the niqab as an expression of their identity or beliefs,” Dalhuisen said.
“Restrictions on human rights must always be proportionate to a legitimate goal. A total ban on full-face veils would not be,” he said.
Last week, one hundred and forty one parliamentarians in Belgium voted for the measure, two abstained and none opposed it.
The London-based human rights organisation called on the Belgian Senate to exercise its prerogative to review the law and carefully consider it in the light of Belgium’s obligations under international human rights law.
“Though the law is worded in general terms so as to criminalise any covering of the face that would prevent identification, it is clear from the parliamentary debates that the law’s main aim is to prevent Muslim women from wearing full veils,” it said.
Belgian politicians argued that the law is necessary for public security and to protect women from being forced to wear full-face veils.
But Amnesty said it believes that legitimate security concerns can be met by targeted restrictions on the complete covering of the face in well-defined high risk locations.
“In the absence of any demonstrable link between the wearing of full-face veils in Belgium and genuine threats to public safety, there can be no justification for the restriction on the freedom of expression and religion that a complete ban on the wearing of face veils in public places would entail,” Dalhuisen said.
“Far from upholding the rights of women, such a general ban would violate the rights of those who choose to wear full face veils, while doing little to protect those who do so against their will, who risk even greater confinement as a result,” he said.
“The obligation to combat discrimination cannot be fulfilled by imposing a measure that is itself discriminatory,” warned Dalhuisen.