Generally, Hijab (Headscarf) and Naqab (Veil or burqa) are both considered the sign of a repressive and regressive society in the context of gender justice. Then why did wearing Hijab even become a point of discussion? Writes Prafulla Ketkar
Before this January 16, very few people must have heard something like World Hijab Day. Now the Hijab controversy is all over the place. The battle started in the educational campus and has now reached the court of law. From Islamists to liberals, many prominent faces from the ‘secular cabal’ came out to support girls from a senior secondary school demanding their right to wear Hijab while studying. In many parts of Bharat, posters came out, putting Hijab (Headscarf) over Kitab (Books). In response, Hindu students in Karnataka demanding equality in the schools also protested with saffron shawls. These protests and counter-protests also witnessed violence and Kashmir-type stone-pelting.
Generally, Hijab (Headscarf) and Naqab (Veil) are both considered the sign of a repressive and regressive society in the context of gender justice. Then why did wearing Hijab even become a point of discussion?
The supporters of wearing a Hijab in a secondary school or pre-university college argue that it is a matter of choice for women. Even political leaders who intend to milk the issue for political gains try to equate it with wearing jeans or a bikini in public. This logic is most frivolous, as this debate is not about women’s choice but entry into an educational institution. Any sensible person believing in constitutional democracy would not ban Hijab in public places if a woman chose to do so. Most of the prominent, celebrity Muslim women who decided to get rid of this regressive custom are now supporting identity above education, knowing very well that this is not about choices for women about their appearance in public places. Every education institution has a dress code for inculcating a sense of equality and discipline among students. Earlier in a similar case, the Kerala High Court, in the judgement delivered in December 2018 by Justice A Muhamed Mustaque, made it amply clear that the “petitioners cannot seek imposition of their individual right as against the larger right of the institution. It is for the institution to decide whether the petitioners can be permitted to attend the classes with the headscarf and full sleeve shirt”. So the issue is not about choice but the sanctity of and equality in educational institutions.
Many Islamic countries would not have seen a movement by women groups against this imposition by clerics. Most developed countries have banned it in public places, calling it the promotion of radicalism. Therefore, the ‘liberals’ who take pride in mocking every Hindu tradition and festival coming out in support of Hijab is the most dangerous trend.
As the lawyer associated with the Congress party, appearing for the Hijab supporters, argued, quoting various interpretations from Hadith (a significant source of Islamic laws and morality), it is all about an essential part of the religion. The lawyer shamelessly quoted prescribed “punishment for not covering head and not wearing long dress”. Is the fear of punishment also about choice? Asserting the identity of a male-dominated and interpreted monotheistic religion is the main agenda behind this agitation; few girls students demanding Hijab as their right are just the instruments. The main instigator behind this entire agitation, the Campus Front of India, an extended wing of the notorious Popular Front of India, indicted in the Delhi Riots cases, wants to promote segregated religious identity from the student life. An attempt to sow the seeds of religious bigotry by the male-controlled fundamentalist organizations should be called out openly and discarded squarely.
