- The right to education is indeed a fundamental right but the onus of utilising this lies on the individual wherein they have to follow the rules and regulations of the organisation.
- At a time when Saudi Arabia is reforming itself progressively, the arguments and defence put forward by many educated Indians is alarming.
- It is high time that Indian Muslims in general and Muslim women, in particular, introspect on some of the draconian practises they are subjected to and fight for their liberty.
- Successive governments have failed to establish a proper perspective of history to the Indian Muslims which may have been difficult but necessary for the prosperity of the country.
- There is hope that the court in all its wisdom gives a judgement that can be considered another step towards empowerment and upliftment of women in India.
It all started when a group of Muslim girls insisted on attending classes while wearing hijab in Udupi, Karnataka. The school administration rightfully informed them of the rules and didn’t allow them to attend the classes. The girls say the practice of hijab in the classroom is nothing new and many senior students used to do it. But, notwithstanding some rare exceptions, the school administration insists that the general rule accepted is contrary to the assertions of these students. Normally Muslim girls studying in the school would wear hijab or burqa from their house and remove them as soon as they reached the colleges or schools, and the insistence of the girls wearing hijab inside the classes room is a new phenomenon.
The Muslim girls who are involved in this incident give a two-prong argument. First, this is a matter of the right to education and school authorities obstructing their fundamental right. The right to education is indeed a fundamental right and specifically women education. India is constantly trying to promote education programmes like ‘Beti Bachao Beti Padhao’ to educate the masses on the importance of girls’ education. But the onus of utilising this, lies on individuals where they have to follow the rules and regulations of the organisation, in this context, the rule of uniform specifically. If the school authority had said that Muslim girls cannot enter classrooms in which case it would have Been obstruction of a fundamental right. But the school administration is simply asking the students to follow proper etiquette to enter the classroom. For example, the right to food is a basic right but this doesn’t mean school teachers can accept students eating inside the classroom while in the middle of a lecture.
Progress vs Regress
The other argument is that the right to practice a religion which is a fundamental right is being hampered by not allowing hijab. First of all the practice of hijab or Burqa is fundamentally a very regressive practice of medieval times which was used to oppress women. Even Saudi Arabia, which is the birthplace of Islam recently relaxed the law of compulsory Burqa and has started promoting yoga for a healthy lifestyle. At a time when Saudi Arabia is reforming itself progressively, the arguments and defence put forward by many educated Indians is alarming. The contrast of Muslim women in Afghanistan rallying for freedom from age-old oppressive laws and Indian Muslim girls rallying in for freedom to wear hijab and burqa is interesting to study. This raises serious questions. Have the girls in India seen something that Afghan Muslim women who practised the same missed? Or is it the other way round? This is the question our social, secular and feminist thinkers must ponder over for the future. It is high time that Indian Muslims in general and Muslim women, in particular, introspect on some of the draconian practises they are subjected to and fight for their liberty.
Right to religion is a fundamental right but fundamental right is not absolute. Rights are subjected to reasonable restrictions. If someone insists on crucifixion or honour killings citing religious reasons can it be allowed? It must be remembered that if the hijab in classrooms is justified in the name of religion then continuing the argument there is justification in the actions of Taliban where they are insisting women to follow Fundamental, oppressive and medieval rules, failing which giving inhumane punishments. The justification given by the Taliban for their atrocities is religious texts which they properly and sincerely quote. It must be understood that schools that too are run by the government have their own set of rules and the students who wish to take advantage of them must adhere to them, for it is that temple of knowledge to raise the conscience and strive for higher ideals.
There is also a point made by many about secularism which according to them gives Muslim women the to practise their religion no matter how unjust the law may be. This points to the crude understanding of secularism. The concept of secularism began in the West where the Pope superseded the king and started to take control of the state. To avoid this they came up with a concept where they said there must be a firm divide between church and state. Even by this logic, there must be no religious representations in a secular institution like a school.
Historical background
The history of India with Islam is not pleasant, to say the least with some genuine exceptions. Starting with Mohammed of Ghazni, India was invaded by many initially to plunder and loot and later to reside and rule for its wealth and hospitable weather conditions compared to the hostile condition of the Middle East.
During Independence movement, when it was decided that India will be partitioned into Muslim ruled Pakistan and Hindu ruled India, some of our leaders insisted Muslims continue residing in India without having any discussion or vision on the dynamics of the relationship. This was mainly due to their anxiety that in the course of these discussions the Muslims who decided to stay back might get offended. This can be seen even in our Constitution where the issues of contentions like uniform civil code, cow protection, etc were included as directive principles of state policy which has only delayed the inevitable. It should have been made clear from the initial stages that the nation and its culture takes precedence over religion. It is due to the lack of a firm stance, Indian Muslims still recognise themselves with invaders and bigots in our history like Tipu Sultan, Aurangzeb and Islamic Arabic traditions rather than recognising the fact that their predecessors were the ones who suffered in the hands of these rulers. This lack of clarity and communication has led to many problems since Independence.
Successive governments have failed to establish a proper perspective of history to the Indian Muslims which may have been difficult but necessary for the prosperity of the country. Instead, the initial governments of India made appeasement and twisted forms of secularism as their policy, hoping that the real issues do not surface which has harmed India time and time again. Even important issues of the nation were made contentious issues fearing the destruction of the status quo. Be it Ram mandir, GyanVapi mosque issue, uniform civil code, Kashmir Pandit exodus and recently citizenship amendment act for which previous governments instead of communicating and educating the people was reluctant to take any stand regarding this, hoping that will rollover.
Conclusion
Hijab issue this time brings back the memories of the Shah Bano case, where an elderly Muslim woman was inhumanly treated by her husband citing Islamic religious beliefs. Helpless and out of options, she approached the court for Justice. The Supreme Court of India after hearing all the arguments gave a landmark judgement where it upheld justice and personal freedom above religious personal laws. The judgement gave a lot of courage and faith to Indian Muslim women to take a firm stand on the issues of freedom and release them from the shackles of some mediaeval oppressive draconian laws.
The issue of hijab is in the High Court at this moment and there is hope that the court in all its wisdom gives a judgement that can be considered another step towards empowerment and upliftment of women in India.
(The views expressed are authors own)
Shreyas has an M.Sc. in Psychology and serves in NIMHANS. He writes regularly on politics, society, international affairs and technology. Views expressed are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the views of SamvadaWorld or its staff.
Balaji Subramanian 
Dhruv Ashok 
Aayush Pal