france
Turban Chaos
Matters come to a head for the Sikh community in Paris as schools enforce the ban on religious symbols Updates
Drive down the streets of Bobigny, an eastern suburb of Paris, and you'll come across Lycee Louise Michel. At the gate of this school, you'll find three Sikh lads standing all day long, staging a satyagraha against the Law of Secularism (la loi sur la laicite) which prohibits state-funded educational institutions from admitting students displaying religious symbols—scarves, turbans and the like.
 
 
Teacher unions are said to have forced the issue. Sikh

students say their teachers don't object.
 
 
The new law came into force on September 2, the first day of the new academic year in France.

When the three Sikh students—Dharmveer Singh, Jasvir Singh and Bikramjit Singh—reached Louise Michel, they were aghast to hear the principal order them out for sporting the turban. His decision belied the previous assurances he and other French authorities had held out to them—that the new law wasn't to apply to Sikh students. "Until the school acquiesces, we will stand at the gate every day," says Bikramjit. "No Sikh can walk without his head covered."

The school cites opposition from the teachers' union and some students to justify the action. The Sikh students counter, saying neither their classmates nor teachers endorse the exclusion. "Perhaps," says Jasvir, "some teachers objected to our turbans. But they don't teach us, we would not have come in contact with them."

Estimated to number between 5,000 and 25,000 countrywide, most Sikhs in Paris live in the town of Bobigny. The schools here fall under the jurisdiction of the director of education for Creteil, Jean Charles Ringard. It seems he and others in the education ministry had assured the Sikhs that the new law would not apply to them. "Even a day before September 2, I was told by the authorities that my kids could go to school wearing turbans," says restaurateur Parmjit Singh.

September 2 shocked Parmjit, as it has most others in the community. His elder son, 15, was asked to remove the turban and was turned away from the Mozart School in Blanc Mesnil when he refused. His younger son, 7, was luckier: he was admitted because he uses a handkerchief instead of a turban. But as Parmjit says, "The principal has told us that should any student protest, my boy will have to remove the handkerchief."

The education authorities themselves are exasperated, helpless against the powerful teachers' union. Ringard, for instance, has been tirelessly campaigning with schools in Creteil not to disallow students wearing the turban. All but three schools agreed to heed his pleas. Ironically, the three schools were precisely those where Sikhs study. Ringard then proposed to transfer the students to schools prepared to admit them.

Sikh elders, however, say Ringard's proposal is no solution. For one, the proposed schools are 50-60 km away. Second, there's no guarantee that the new school would not reject them at a later date. "This is what happened to one student," says Gurdial Singh, a prominent businessman. "He was transferred to a new school but it has now turned him away. The authorities are now looking for a third school."

A sense of despair prevails among the Sikhs. Last week, the local Bobigny gurudwara held a meeting to discuss the issue. The mood was defiant; most speakers emphasised the importance of turban and patka and urged the community not to succumb. Says Kashmir Singh, a member of the gurudwara managing committee, "We know our children's future is at stake. So, instead of wearing the turban, they can wear the patka or a small cloth to cover their hair. But under no circumstances will they go bareheaded to school." Even the children present at the meeting agreed. Says Bikramjit, "It does not matter if I lose a year. At least future generations won't have to fight this battle."

And fight the Sikhs will, through protests and appeals to court.Says Chain Singh, another member of the managing committee of the Bobigny gurudwara, "We'll again take to the streets to make our demands heard. If we fail, we'll consider options like sending our children to neighbouring countries for education. It's preferable to leave France than leave the turban."
 
Daily MailPublished
COLLAPSE COMMENTS :
HAVE YOUR SAY
Sep 17, 2004 12:00 AM
10
This is a case of secularism gone mad. While I applaud the sentiment behind it, I think the real issue should have been to check whether outward religious symbols constituted an overbearing part of the person's attire or not. Whatever the french govt says about it, this regulation is quite obviously designed to target Muslims. The French government, like many other countries in Europe, is now suffering for years of silly political correctness and massive influx of Muslims from Northern Africa. However, the effect of thesew regulations will only be to create yet another "thing" that hard-core Muslims can use for their own ends. The real way to combat excessive religious symbols is through education and not through repression.
Rustam Roy
London, UK
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
9
Lalit,

"There could be a positive side to the ban on turbans. It could provide a way out for young sikhs , who may have a secret wish to join the other lads with short hair."

VERY TRUE.
Gowrishankar E S
Derry, UK
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
8
Mr. Amar,

For your info, 'why sue Macdonalds for serving fries cooked in beef mixed oil just for religious beliefs' is not correct.

McDonald was sued for NOT declaring that the French Fries served by them were fried in beef fat, and that is against the law. This mis-representation of facts was objected by all vegetarians, Hindus being the vocal lot.
Ekaamaadmi
Mumbai, India
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
7
What is it about the Europeans that they just cannot stop being xenophobic, specially the French and the Germans? Is it the genes? Is it all the wine (or beer in case of Germans) that they consume? Is there something in the air and water of Europe that makes people there so pathetic.

So what the French want is a set of uniform looking human beings who dress and behave in the same manner, that manner being decided by some government officials.

If this is the French solution for integrating people of various ethnic backgrounds into mainstream then god save the land of Napolean. And where does it stop? Are Indian women banned from wearing Sari or Salwar-Kameez?
Vikas Chowdhry
Madison, USA
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
6
Gowrishankar
_______________

There could be a positive side to the ban on turbans. It could provide a way out for young sikhs , who may have a secret wish to join the other lads with short hair.

God, how much fuss can made in the name of religion.I could be wrong, but I thought that the sikhs 5 religious requirements were based on times when they were required to fight the muslims. Thats no longer necessary.

Regarding the recent French legislation,its mainly against the hijab. The general ban against all religious symbols(not just the hijab) is to prove that the government is being even handed.This should allay some of the hurt felt by the hairy ones.

Likewise all people entering the USA are being finger printed. The US government can not just finger print muslims alone, which is the real intent. Think of the protests and demonstrations if this was done.
lalit bagai
kalundborg, danmark
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
5
Well there are two aspects to the discussion
1) Is what French did is correct: There are only two basis two judge if any law is wrong. Whether it is against human rights or against national interest. I am sure wearing religious symbols is no way are against national interest but definately it is a human right. If someone is intimated by scarfs, turban or caps then I am equally intimated by seeing Church, Temple or Mosque on road, or seeing a black guy on road, shall be ban them. The western countries including France were foremost in protesting against communism practice of baning Church and religion. And if my friends in India agree so much with French on this law, they should also agree that Muslims in India should have right to eat beef. Why ban cow slaughter just for cause of Hindu emotions? Additionally why sue Macdonalds for serving fries cooked in beef mixed oil just for religious beliefs.
2) Should Indian Government involve in this: This question is more tricky,as it is France internal affair. Every Goverment in the world does protest against laws in other countries that somewhat affects human rights of people of its origin there, like UK against Zimbabwe, France against Angola, or in general cases like against apartheid. Infact the whole west supports Israel just because of Jeruselum.
So, there is nothing wrong if Indian Government can make some formal or informal request to the French Government in this regard.
Hindus have lost their identity in their own country that spreaded from Afganistan to Thailand by not protesting to anyone who tried to rob us of it, so probably it is easy to preach others the same.
amar
michigan, USA
Sep 14, 2004 12:00 AM
4
A year ago, I had the rare previlege of witnessing one of my friends, a brave Sikh shaving away his beard, cutting his hair to a modern style and doing away with his turban. All in the hands of a Pakistani Muslim barber in London! When I asked him if that was not against his religion, he asked me one question: "Why should I go around announcing my religion with my looks all through my life? I dont like to be identified by my religion, but my individuality." I liked his courage and progressive thoughts.

However, that was a voluntary decision. Compelling someone to do something against his faith is a tricky affair. While it sounds ok to reform burqa culture in Islam and liberating the Muslim women from orthodoxy, it is very difficult to draw the line. For example, who should decide how people should be? Under what authority? The dot on the forehead of a girl shows she is a Hindu. Could that be banned as well? The fact it is cultural rather than religious is understood, but it does announce her religion.

The whole thing is very tricky. It is really difficult to achieve a balance between reforms/liberation and religious freedom.
Gowrishankar E S
Derry, UK
Sep 13, 2004 12:00 AM
3
I am sorry, but the Sikhs like to point out that their Gurus "denounced all superstition" - now could someone explain how not shaving one's hair and being required to wear a turban every day of their lives do not qualify as superstitions?
How do the Sikhs expect the French to enforce laws for Muslims and exempt them form the same? I think the Sikhs should live up to the teaching of their Gurus and stop making such a fuss about turbans and facial hair.
Adi
XXXXX, USA
Sep 13, 2004 12:00 AM
2
Each era in the human civilisation throws up some challenge and we need to cope with the changing circumstances.

The banning of religious symbols from schools and public places is a step in the right direction. It curbs the evil of islamic fundamentalism. We all know the kind of havoc the islamic terrorists are creating in the valley by wearing burkhas. Any ban on burkhas will, to a certain extent, reduce the terrorist acts.

As regards the statment that no Sikh would go around without the head covered, well, I have seen a lot of Singhs without turbans. And if they have to forego certain things for the better of the society at large, so be it.
The French have taken a bold decision and may they have the courage and willpower to execute the decision
sanjeev
hyderabad, india
Sep 12, 2004 12:00 AM
1
"To sin by silence when they should protest
makes cowards of men..."
- Abraham Lincoln
amar
michigan, USA
COLLAPSE COMMENTS   
Post a Comment
You are not logged in, please log in or register
ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SUBSCRIBE | ADVERTISING RATES | COPYRIGHT & DISCLAIMER | COMMENTS POLICY