Why we must oppose a ban on the Burka

The Burka or the headscarf is perhaps the most controversial of apparels worn in the world today. It is upheld by several traditionalists as well as ordinary Muslims, and continues to be one of the most frequently worn robes among Muslim women. Fashioned differently in different parts of the Muslim world, from a simple headscarf in Iran and Turkey to a stringent head-to-toe cover in Saudi Arabia, this custom has been criticised by several progressives and reformists everywhere. Interestingly, the Burka has also faced strong criticism from the Christian and Hindu right wing elements, and governments in France, Belgium and the Netherlands have banned the practice altogether. Now, with the rise of the social media propelled ‘alt-right’ in today’s age, the movement to get the Burka banned seems to be getting steady momentum, with Germany also proposing similar legislation. In such a politically volatile atmosphere, it is only fit that only a healthy debate should be allowed to dictate the terms of our society’s discourse.

Enough has been already written on how the practice of wearing the Burka came into being, how it has continued over the centuries, and how its affects the status of women in our society. Yes, it can conclusively be said that there remains no scientific reason or human necessity today which demands this practice. Apart from the continuation of traditions or customs, there is no purpose that the Burka serves. Its critics, however, claim that the robe itself is a form of suppression and misogyny, with the its sole purpose being to ensure the subservience of women to men. This is a very good argument, and those in favour of the Burqa have been unable to provide any convincing counter-narrative. 

I agree with the critics in their analysis of the problem, but I stand vehemently opposed to the solution they propose(a ban). A ban on the Burka, I am convinced is ill-conceived, and its implementation even self-defeating on two levels. 

One: True ‘good governance’ implies that the government’s job is only to ensure the implementation of the country’s constitution, and to uphold the rule of law. This in itself is one mammoth of a job. The government should have no business in interfering in matters which cause no detriment to the constitution or the rule of law. I make this point for the government’s non-intervention particularly in this case, since the adherence to this social practice results in no direct infringement of a woman’s fundamental rights, and neither brings into jeopardy her physical or mental well-being as defined by law. While I do agree that the Burka is undesirable, it is the job of a vibrant civil society, and not the ruling government to ‘reform’ (actually intervene in) people’s lives. This is certainly not a thumb rule, and the government indeed must act if there is real damage or injury if being caused. Over the past two hundred years, the Government of India (both imperial and representative) has been benevolent in its abolishing of widow-burning or sati, child marriage, and female foeticide, among many other abominations. After a dispassionate and critical analysis, one would agree that wearing the hijab as a custom, however unwanted, cannot match the criminal consequences of these other evil practices. Hence the government should only stay away from this matter.

Two: The implications of such a ban. The proponents of such a ban are under the impression that a ban would ‘liberate’ Muslim women from the clutches of the generally misogynistic and patriarchal societies that they are a part of. They overlook the simple fact that no ban on any clothing can solve the real problem- the society itself. This ban, in fact, would make the problem much worse, as it would take away the little mobility and freedom that women from such close-knit communities have in the first place. 

I can explain my case with a simple example: the Muslim women who frequent a jogger’s park  in my neighbourhood (Scottish Garden in Mahim). After around 8PM, when most of the regular crowd leaves, the largest demographic left in this park is that of Burka clad women. Mostly homemakers, they come to the garden in search of some fresh air and a refreshing walk. Do the proponents of the Burka ban (so called reformists)  really think that if a ban is implemented, that these poor women would still have the freedom to leave their houses for an evening walk? In all probability, their families would ensure that they remain confined even those few precious hours that they today have to themselves (notwithstanding while wearing a Burka). My heartfelt question to the proponents of the ban is, what right do you have in stealing the few hours of freedom that these women enjoy today?

'Freedom'