Tunisian court reinstates veiled teacher

10/10/2007

A Tunisian court has overturned a decision by the Ministry of Education to suspend a public school teacher for wearing a veil at work. Some consider the legal decision an indication of the independence of the country's judiciary.

By Jamel Arfaoui for Magharebia in Tunis – 10/10/07

[Getty Images] The court struck down the law, saying it gave the state too much power to interfere in personal preferences.

Tunisian NGO Liberty and Equity announced on Monday (October 8th) that administrative court judge Samia El Bekri issued a ruling last week to end the suspension of a secondary school teacher for her insistence on wearing the veil to work.

El Bekri deemed Circular No. 102, issued in 1986, which prohibits women from wearing the veil, unconstitutional and called upon the Ministry of Education to reinstate the teacher and compensate her both financially and personally. The teacher, Saiida Adali, was suspended by the Ministry under a resolution in accordance with the Circular, issued during Habib Bourguiba's reign. The law was originally intended to minimize the spread of Islamic radicalism stemming from the Iranian revolution. Tunisians made a link between such the revolutionary ideology and the veil – many Tunisians still consider the veil to be divisive and alien to their national tradition.

Commenting on the decision, Chamber of Councillors member Samir Abdallah told Magharebia that "this decision stresses the independence of the Tunisian judiciary, contrary to what is being said by some voices questioning its impartiality." Abdallah referred to the refusal by the Democratic Progressive Party (PDP) last week to deal with the Tunisian judiciary in a real-estate dispute, over which the party's Secretary-General and newspaper director have been on hunger strike since September 20th.

"The administrative court's decision did not surprise me in its boldness and moral courage. We are used to seeing such courage [as] it has previously cancelled several ministerial resolutions," Abdallah said. "From my experience as a lawyer, I was able to see just treatment of litigants who were victims of arbitrary decisions. The recent decision confirms there is no power over the judiciary except the power of law and the judge's conscience."

Khadija Cherif, President of the Democratic Women's Association said, "This decision will not change our attitude concerning the campaign against veil-wearing." She continued, saying "We also stress that our fight is societal and that we refused and still refuse to confront the veil through circulars, regulations and violence. Persuasion and dialogue are our approach."

Administrative court decisions are binding to the executive authority and litigants may execute the judgments passed to their benefit against the government agencies.

In defence of its decision against the Ministry of Education, the court declared that Circular 102 "interferes in personal freedoms, since such dress expresses distinctively cultural, religious and intellectual belonging and reflects personal inclination."

The court also said Circular 102 gives the administration unlimited authority, which threatens basic freedoms including the freedom of religious belief, guaranteed by the constitution, and offers a vehicle to constrain individual rights and freedoms.