18 July 2021
Press Release Regarding the Decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union on Wearing Headscarves at Work
The recent decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) regarding two companies banning headscarves for their employees in Germany is an open violation of the right of religion.
This decision constitutes a further example of the efforts to institutionalise and legalise hate and intolerance against Muslims in Europe.
It is a fact that Muslims are exposed to intolerance, hate speech and even violence, are subjected to widespread stigmatization and exclusion from socio-economic life and that especially Muslim women are adversely affected by this situation. This undeniably dangerous trend which indicates that lessons have not been learned from the bitter experiences of the past is also highlighted in the reports of the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) and the UN Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion and Belief.
And yet, at a time when hatred against Islam, racism and the poison of hate that take Europe hostage, are on the rise, the CJEU’s decision not only ignores freedom of religion, but also provides a basis and legal cover for discrimination. We condemn this decision which is legally and conscientiously wrong and dangerous in terms of hate against Islam it will fuel.
SOURCE: MIN OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS , REP OF TURKEY
Note: The court ruled
Court of Justice of the European Union
PRESS RELEASE No 128/21
Luxembourg, 15 July 2021
Judgment in Joined Cases C-804/18 and C-341/19
WABE and MH Müller Handel
“A prohibition on wearing any visible form of expression of political, philosophical or religious beliefs in the workplace may be justified by the employer’s need to present a neutral image towards customers or to prevent social disputes”
“It points out, in that regard, that such a limited prohibition is liable to have a greater effect on people with religious, philosophical or non-denominational beliefs which require the wearing of a large-sized sign, such as a head covering. Thus, where the criterion of wearing conspicuous, largesized signs of the aforementioned beliefs is inextricably linked to one or more specific religions or beliefs, the prohibition on wearing those signs based on that criterion will mean that some workers will be treated less favourably than others on the basis of their religion or belief, which would amount to direct discrimination, which cannot be justified”.