In early 2022, several schools and colleges in the Indian state of Karnataka banned Muslim girls and women from wearing hijabs in classrooms. This controversial decision led to protests by Muslims who saw it as an attack on their religious freedom. However, those in favor of the ban argued it was necessary to uphold uniform rules and secular values in educational institutions. The issue highlighted tensions between India’s Hindu majority and Muslim minority populations.
What is a hijab?
A hijab is a headscarf worn by many Muslim women to cover their hair and neck in public. It is seen as part of modest Islamic dress code. The word hijab comes from the Arabic word “hajaba” meaning to conceal or hide from view. While not mentioned directly in the Quran, several verses encourage modesty. Many Islamic scholars argue hijab is mandatory, while others say it is optional.
There are different styles of hijab worn around the world. The niqab covers the entire face apart from the eyes. The burqa is a full body covering with a mesh screen over the eyes. The styles worn by Muslim women in India usually only cover the hair and neck. Hijabs come in many colors but black is most common. They are worn during daily life, prayers and religious ceremonies.
Why did some schools ban hijabs?
In January 2022, the Government PU College in Karnataka’s Udupi district barred six female Muslim students from entering classrooms because they were wearing hijabs. The principal said hijabs violated the institution’s dress code which prohibited religious clothing. This kicked off a controversy across the state as more schools issued similar bans.
Those in favor of the bans argued:
- Educational institutions have the right to implement dress codes and uniform rules.
- Allowing hijabs could set a precedent for other religious demands.
- Hijabs undermine secular values and promote communal differences.
- Headscarves prevent proper identification of students.
The Karnataka education minister claimed the bans were not targeting any community but simply enforcing discipline and equality.
How did Muslim students respond?
Muslim students affected by the hijab bans held protests arguing it was their constitutional right to wear hijabs as part of their faith. They said singling out hijabs while allowing other religious items like turbans was hypocritical.
Some Muslim girls chose to stay home from school rather than remove their hijabs. Others wore hijabs despite the ban and were denied entry to classrooms. In one case, a Muskan Khan faced shouts of “Jai Shri Ram” by Hindu students for wearing a hijab at her college. She responded by shouting “Allah hu Akbar.” This video went viral on social media.
Muslim advocacy groups petitioned the Karnataka High Court challenging the legality of the bans. They argued fundamental rights to freedom of religion and education were being violated. However, a judge upheld the ban pending further hearings.
How did the issue spread beyond Karnataka?
The hijab controversy soon spilled over to other parts of India. Hindu students in some areas began wearing saffron shawls to protest Muslim girls wearing hijabs in class. Tensions also erupted in Modi’s home state of Gujarat where some schools banned hijabs.
In February, a clash broke out between Hindu and Muslim students over the hijab issue at Mahatma Gandhi Memorial College in Udupi. This led to days of unrest and a temporary closure of educational institutions. Overall, the dispute highlighted communal friction and nationalism in Indian society.
Why did the Karnataka government back the hijab ban?
The BJP, which governs Karnataka, officially supported the bans. Education minister B.C Nagesh said those unwilling to follow uniform rules had the choice of not attending school. He argued the purpose of education is not religion but becoming good citizens.
Other BJP leaders said Muslim women in India historically did not wear hijabs but the practice was introduced recently by Islamic hardliners. They accused opposition parties of using the issue to divide people.
The BJP promotes Hindu nationalism and its critics accuse it of marginalizing minorities like Muslims and Christians. However, it said the hijab ban applied equally to all communities. The party rejects accusations of being anti-Muslim.
What was the final High Court verdict?
On March 15, the Karnataka High Court ruled to uphold the state government’s ban on hijabs in classrooms. The three-judge bench stated wearing the hijab “is not an essential religious practice” in Islam protected under freedom of religion.
The court backed the February government order which banned clothing disturbing equality, integrity and public order in schools and colleges. The judges argued institutions had the power to prescribe uniform guidelines.
They dismissed the petitioners’ claims that banning the hijab violated Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Indian constitution. The court said wearing a hijab should be a matter of individual choice outside educational institutions.
How did India’s Supreme Court respond?
Some Muslim students impacted by the ban appealed the High Court verdict in the Supreme Court of India. They argued fundamental rights were being violated.
However, the Chief Justice declined an urgent hearing and said the matter would be listed before the appropriate bench in due course. The court said the ban should be implemented, but added it would intervene if there was any coercion against wearing the hijab.
This meant schools in Karnataka could continue enforcing the hijab ban for the time being. The issue could still be taken up by the Supreme Court in the future. But academic activities resumed without hijabs per the state’s order.
What was the wider public reaction?
The hijab ban stirred up polarizing debate across India. Many liberal voices argued it unfairly targeted Muslims and infringed on religious freedom. They said choice of attire was an individual right. On the other hand, those supporting the ban called it a necessary step toward upholding secular values.
Several Muslim women around India protested the ban by posting pictures in hijab with slogans like “My hijab, my right.” Some non-Muslims also voiced support for their right to wear it. However, hardline Hindu groups backed the ban as part of defending Hindu nationalism.
Overall, the issue highlighted deep communal divisions as well as the struggle to balance rights and regulations regarding religious expression in public institutions. For critics, the ban was another example of rising intolerance toward minorities under BJP rule.
How did Islamic nations respond?
The hijab ban sparked criticism from Islamic countries. Pakistan said it was “alarming” and urged the international community to ensure Muslim rights in India. Iran and Saudi Arabia also condemned the ban.
However, India termed their statements “motivated comments” on internal affairs. The Indian foreign minister accused Pakistan of supporting extremism and said India respected all religions.
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation raised concerns about anti-Muslim vitriol during the controversy. But India insisted the matter was under judicial review andflatten inflammatory statements.
Conclusion
The hijab ban in Karnataka sparked controversy about balancing religious freedom, equal rights and secularism. Supporters argued it was necessary to enforce uniform dress codes and prevent communal divisions. But critics saw it as discriminatory toward Muslims who consider wearing the hijab as essential religious practice.
While the High Court upheld the ban, some students have appealed to the Supreme Court. The case highlighted tensions between India’s Hindu majority and large Muslim minority population. It demonstrated challenges around issues of identity, nationalism and pluralism. The outcome carries implications for other cases about expression of religion in public spaces.
| Argument For Banning Hijabs | Argument Against Banning Hijabs |
|---|---|
| Allows educational institutions to implement uniform dress codes | Infringes on religious freedom of Muslim women |
| Prevents communal differences in classrooms | Targets Muslim community unfairly |
| Upholds secular values in public institutions | Choice of attire is a personal right |
| Sets a precedent against other religious demands | Goes against constitutional principles of equality |
| Improves student identification and discipline | Furthers marginalization of minorities like Muslims |