Country of origin information report Turkey March 2007

Return to contents

Go to list of sources
Headscarves
18.12 As outlined by Kirsty Hughes, in a paper dated December 2004, entitled ‘The political dynamics of Turkish accession to the EU: a European success story or the EU most contested enlargement?’
“The secularism-Islam debate remains a powerful, divisive and contentious theme in Turkish politics… The hijab or headscarf has become the most potent symbol of this debate, which then inevitably spills over into other connected debates on human rights. Many secular human rights and women’s NGOs, in asserting and calling for both women’s rights and religious rights as part of the wider range of basic rights, do now argue that it is, and must be, a woman’s individual choice and right to dress as she likes, and that traditional (mostly male) conservative secularists and Islamists on both extremes should stop focusing their fight and disagreement over the control of what women wear…International human rights organisations have also waded into this debate. Human Rights Watch, has called for women’s individual rights to be respected, and for full access to higher education for all women irrespective of their independent decisions on head covering… Overall, to continue banning the headscarf in universities and in parliament and in public offices, amounts to an extensive discrimination against women in the workplace rather than simply reflecting a particular form of secularism and so the status quo may be unlikely to hold.” [77] (p13-14)
18.13 The thirty-second session of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in its concluding comments on Turkey dated 28 January 2005 stated:
“The Committee requests the State party to monitor and assess the impact of the ban on wearing headscarves and to compile information on the number of women who have been excluded from schools and universities because of the ban. It also calls on the State party to undertake further awareness-raising on the importance of education or women’s equality and economic opportunities, and to overcome stereotypical attitudes.” [81] (p7)
18.14 On 23 February 2005 the BBC reported that the Turkish parliament had granted an amnesty to 677,000 men and women who have been expelled from university over the past five years.
“The amnesty includes those expelled from university because their refusal to remove the Islamic headscarf. However, the regulation restricting the scarf remains in place. Turkey maintains a division between religion and state which includes a ban on the headscarf in universities and the civil service. Only a small minority of those expelled from Turkish universities over the last five years fell foul of the headscarf ban, but such is the controversy over it that the ban dominated debate before the amnesty issue came to parliament. Nearly 10 years after the restriction came into force, the two sides – religious Muslims and the secular establishment – are no closer to consensus. The secular establishment insists that the ban maintains the separation of religion and state enshrined in the constitution. More orthodox Muslims and human rights campaigners complain that it is an abrogation of freedom of expression and worship. A clear majority in Turkey, which is overwhelmingly Muslim, would like to see the ban lifted.” [66r]
18.15 The USSD 2005 report noted that:
“In May [2005] Constitutional Court president Mustafa Bumin and speaker of parliament Bulent Arinc engaged in a public dispute over the headscarf ban. Bumin asserted in a speech that the Constitutional Court would annul any parliamentary legislation aimed at lifting the ban; Arinc replied that parliament has the authority to close the court. In November the ECHR Grand Chamber upheld a 2004 ECHR ruling that the ban on Islamic headscarves in the country’s universities was not unlawful.” [5b] (Section 2c)
18.16 As noted in the USSD Report on Religious Freedom 2006:
“Authorities continued to enforce a long-term ban on the wearing of headscarves at universities and by civil servants in public buildings. Women who wear headscarves and persons who actively show support for those who defy the ban have been disciplined or have lost their jobs in the public sector as nurses and teachers. Students who wear head coverings are officially not permitted to register for classes, although some faculty members permit students to wear head coverings in class. Many secularists accuse Islamists of using advocacy for wearing the headscarf as a political tool and say they fear that efforts to repeal the headscarf ban will lead to pressure against women who choose not to wear a head covering.” [5e] (Section II)

17. 
    As noted in the Human Rights Watch (HRW) World Report 2007, published in January 2007:
    

“Women who wear the headscarf for religious reasons are still denied access to higher education, the civil service, and political life. However, during 2006 the ban was applied much more broadly than only to state institutions. In late 2005, the Administrative Supreme Court upheld a ruling that Aytaç Kılınç, a teacher, could not be promoted because she wore a headscarf when she was not on school premises. Officials also barred mothers who wear the headscarf from accompanying their children to school ceremonies and swimming pools; lawyers and journalists were ejected from courtrooms and public meetings at universities because they refused to remove their headscarf.” [9b]