Burkini ban in France: High court to rule on legality

France's top court, the State Council, will consider the question of a burkini ban for French beaches after a turbulent and religiously charged year.

Jason Reed/Reuters
Muslim swimming instructor Fadila Chafic wears her full-length 'burkini' swimsuit during a swimming lesson with her children Taaleen (r.) and Ibrahim at swimming pool in Sydney, Australia, on Wednesday.

After several French cities banned the full body swimsuit called the “burkini,” legal challenges to the ban fell flat. France’s highest court, the State Council, will consider an appeal Thursday.

The “burkini” ban has been controversial for its interpretation of the freedom of religion and human rights. While many critics of the ban say that it prevents Muslim women from practicing their faith in public, others say that the charged climate provoked by several recent terrorist attacks in France makes the ban a necessary part of maintaining public order.

In late July, the mayor of the seaside resort city Cannes issued the first burkini ban, saying that the swimming costume was a symbol of religious extremism.

"Beachwear which ostentatiously displays religious affiliation, when France and places of worship are currently the target of terrorist attacks,” reads Cannes’ ordinance, “is liable to create risks of disrupting public order."

Cannes’ decision to ban the burkini was followed by a similar bans in 14 other French towns, including the Nice-area town of Villeneuve-Loubet.

The controversy over these local ordinances has prompted an international conversation among a number of organizations and individuals who are both for and against the ban.

When the Cannes ban was first announced, at least two human rights groups announced their intentions to challenge it. The French group Collective Against Islamophobia and a group called the Human Rights League were both prepared to issue legal challenges, and other political commentators noted the dubious legality of the ban.

“The effect on society [of the burkini ban] is disastrous,” said Michel Tubiana, president of the Human Rights League, as reported by The Christian Science Monitor's Peter Ford. “It radicalizes both sides, it raises tensions and it encourages isolationism in the Muslim community.”

A French administrative tribunal upheld that ban, however, as well as Villeneuve-Loubet’s ban, prompting lawyers to appeal to France’s highest court. That hearing is scheduled to take place Thursday.

In rejecting the appeal of the Villeneuve-Loubet ban, the administrative tribunal ruled the ban “necessary, appropriate and proportionate” to prevent the bathing suits being seen as a threat to a tense and beleaguered society.

Veiling "is the expression of a political project, a counter-society,” said Prime Minister Manuel Valls, “based notably on the enslavement of women.”

Others, however, say that the swimsuit bans are discriminatory, noting that individuals from other religions are allowed to wear symbols of their religion on the beach – including crosses.

Three women were fined 38 Euros apiece over the weekend in Cannes, after they wore burkini swimsuits to the beach in defiance of the ban.

One of the women, a mother of two, told AFP that she was not even wearing a burkini – simply a regular headscarf. She said she was fined for not "respecting good morals and secularism."

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.