Aishah Azmi

[
Daily Express" launched a "crusade" against the "Veil"] Aishah Azmi is a British Muslim woman who came to public attention after being suspended and then dismissed from her position as a classroom assistant in a Church of England faith school for refusing to take off her niqab face veil when working in class with small children. A picture of her in her niqab appeared on the front pages of British tabloids, such as "The Sun" and the "Daily Mail", as well as newspapers such as the "Daily Telegraph" and "The Times". Prior to the outcome of her religious discrimination tribunal case, Prime Minister Tony Blair broke from the traditional protocol of not commenting on a case before the courts, and gave his backing for her dismissal.

"Azmi v. Kirklees MBC"

When Azmi went for a job interview for the school in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire she was wearing a hijab, which shows the face but not the hair. She did not inform the interviewers that she intended to wear the niqab. When she started her employment she requested that she be allowed to wear the niqab and the school initially agreed. Some reports claim that the school maintains that it decided to ask her to remove the veil only after complaints from the pupils that they were unable to fully understand what she was saying. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6282459.stm Veil row woman challenges sacking] BBC News, 20 January 2007] In fact, the school never raised the issue of complaints from pupils, as can be verified by reference to the Employment Tribunal decision, and no complaints heve ever been evidenced. Azmi informed the school that she would only remove the veil if no male member of staff was present, in accordance with a Muslim interpretation of the Qur'an concerning modesty for women. This stipulation was deemed unacceptable by her employer, Kirklees Council, but rather than take a normal employment law course of instructing her not to wear the niqab, warning her and then dismissing her, it suspended her pending the outcome of the tribunal case. This course of action was expressed to be 'without prejudice' by a spokesman for the local authority. Mrs Azmi remained on full pay although suspended from her position until the outcome of her legal case. She was 23 years old at the time.

Azmi had maintained that the wearing of a niqab was a personal decision, although towards the end of October the "Sunday Times" published an article claiming that her decision was actually made following a consultation with a local Islamic cleric, Mufti Yusuf Sacha at the Tablighi mosque in Dewsbury. Sacha issued a fatwa stating that it was obligatory for women to wear the niqab in the presence of men who were not their blood relatives, and this would include Azmi wearing a niqab whilst working with children. [cite news
first = Abul
last = Taher
title = Veil teacher was obeying a fatwa
url = http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2426770,00.html
format = HTML
work =
publisher = The Sunday Times
date = 2006-10-29
accessdate = 2006-11-24 ] However this fatwa on wearing the niqab is strongly disputed by other British Muslim clerics. Azmi took her case to an employment tribunal on the grounds that she had been discriminated against on religious grounds and that she had been victimised as a result of complaining. The tribunal dismissed her case of religious discrimination but found that she had been victimised. She was awarded £1000 in compensation for this victimisation and, because in dealing with her grievance the school had not followed minimum grievance procedures set out in the law, it was bound to increase this award by between 10% and 50%. It choose the minimum increase of 10% and therefore awarded her £1100 in total. Azmi was subsequently dismissed by Kirklees Council. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6179842.stm School sacks woman after veil row] BBC News, 24 November 2006] She lodged papers with the Employment Appeals Tribunal in London, although she was publicly advised by her MP Shahid Malik to drop the case, since 'there is no real support for it'. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6069012.stm MP tells veil woman 'let it go'] BBC News, 20 November 2006] Azmi's legal representative, Nick Whittingham, of Kirklees Law Centre, expected the case to be heard in the first half of 2007 and in fact it was decided in March 2007: see below. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6282459.stm Veil row woman challenges sacking] BBC News, 20 January 2007]

Government reaction

Her case came on top of remarks by Jack Straw who said that he had asked women visiting his constituency surgeries to consider uncovering their noses and mouths in order to allow better communication. He claimed that no woman had ever chosen to wear a full-veil after this request. [ [http://www.blackburncitizen.co.uk/news/newsheadlines/display.var.954145.0.straw_in_plea_to_muslim_women_take_off_your_veils.php "Blackburn Citizen"] ] [ [http://www.gm.tv/index.cfm?articleid=22773 GMTV - Jack Straw says that relations with the Muslim community are made "more difficult" when Muslim women wear veils - have your say ] ] [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5410472.stm Straw's veil comments spark anger] BBC News] When asked whether he would prefer veils to be abolished completely, Mr Straw said: "Yes. It needs to be made clear I am not talking about being prescriptive but with all the caveats, yes, I would rather." [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/5413470.stm In quotes: Jack Straw on the veil] - BBC News, October 6, 2006] As the case was ongoing, Phil Woolas, a junior minister in the Department for Communities and Local Government, said that "she should be sacked". Tony Blair, the Prime Minister also signalled that he considered women who wore a veil when teaching should be sacked, and added that in his opinion the veil was a "mark of separation" that made him "uncomfortable". [ [http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/72418.html Blair backs suspension of veil woman] "The Sydney Morning Herald". October 18, 2006] [ [http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,1924479,00.html?gusrc=rss Blair backs school in veil row] "The Guardian". October 17, 2006]

Newspaper commentary

Writing in "The Times" on 2 November 2006, Mary Ann Sieghart described Mrs Asmi's refusal to uncover her face when facing a class of young children as being as culturally insensitive as it would be for Ms Sieghart to walk through a souk in the Middle East in shorts. Another broadsheet commentator said that Ms Asmi should have been sacked because she clearly did not care about the education of the children in her care.

Employent Appeal Tribunal March 2007

On 30 March 2007 the Employment Appeal Tribunal dismissed Mrs Asmi’s appeal. It held that the employment tribunal had been entitled to find that she was not directly discriminated against on the ground of religion or belief. The appeal tribunal found that there had been indirect discrimination, but that this was acceptable on the facts of this particular case because it was an appropriate way of raising educational standards. [ [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6511393.stm Veil row assistant loses appeal] BBC News. March 30, 2007] The Employment Appeal Tribunal decision is important because it confirmed for the first time that it is possible for an employer to be held to have discriminated against an employee in relation to an external manifestation of belief (such as a veil) and that such discrimination could be direct or indirect. Employers would only be acting lawfully if the discrimination is indirect and the employer has a lawful justification.

ee also

* Hijab
* Jack Straw
* Sharia
* United Kingdom debate over veils
* Tony Blair
* Khadija Ravat

References

External links

* [http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=1&subID=866 Andrew Gilligan discusses links between Aishah Azmi and Tablighi Jamaat]