[ad_1]
In May 2019, Staffanstorp decided that headscarves would not be accepted for children in preschool and elementary school through sixth grade. In December of the same year, Skurup decided that headscarves, burqas, niqabs and other clothing intended to conceal students and staff should not be allowed in the township’s preschool and elementary schools.
The decisions aroused criticism and was appealed by several people who thought the decisions were illegal, including with reference to religious freedom.
The Malmö administrative court has already tried the issue in two different rulings and considers that the ban should be lifted.
According to the court, decisions to ban veils contravene the provisions on religious freedom in the form of government and the European Convention. The school can only control the clothing of staff or students on two occasions: if contact and interaction between teachers and students is significantly impeded or if clothing involves risks during laboratory work or similar exercises.
“Neither the Education Law nor any other law gives a municipality the right to decide on restrictions in the way they have been produced,” the court writes.
Veil ban proposal He has also been introduced to the Riksdag on several occasions, but was rejected. In relation to this, the Constitution Committee announced that everyone in Sweden is free to dress however they want and that therefore legislation prohibiting veils in society or for children in certain activities should not be considered, writes the administrative court.
– Therefore, there is no legal backing to decide on such bans at the municipal level, says Henrik Hedberg, judge in the case against the municipality of Staffanstorp in a press release.
But the right to wear religious clothing is not absolute. The issue of the ban on headscarves has been tried in the Court of Justice of the European Communities on several occasions and then the bans have been found to be legitimate and acceptable in the countries concerned. In Sweden, the situation is different.
The municipalities, for their part, have said that it is not a prohibition of the veil “since it does not imply any obligation to comply or omit anything,” writes, for example, the municipality of Staffanstorp.
The municipality of Skurup is not satisfied with the decision of the administrative court.
– I have not had time to read the verdict yet, but from what I have seen, it is clear that Skurup needs to appeal the verdict to the Court of Appeal, says Lars Nyström (SD), second vice president of the municipal board.
It considers that the municipality has a greater chance of being heard in a higher instance.
– It may be a completely different assessment, so we think we will have a bigger farm there.
Why is it important to continue the issue of the veil ban?
– We should not have a situation where mainly girls have to hide their face and hair. They are not second-class citizens, says Lars Nyström.
Last week, the Ombudsman Against Discrimination (DO) announced that the ban on the headscarf is not compatible with the Discrimination Law.
