In other words, according to French public opinion and legislators, as long as they stay at home, Muslim women can wear anything they like, but it would be better if these women become “invisible” in public life.There are even people asking for a law in order to codify a ban. Several members of the French National Assembly are willing to ban burqas, niqabs and veils in public areas. They probably have a clear cut definition in their minds about what a public area is. As you may recall from the Turkish debate on the issue, in our country public administration buildings and universities are considered to be “public areas” but public gardens, city buses and public libraries are not labeled as such.
If in France there is certitude about the definition of public places, then the ban on how some women dress is related to security concerns. In fact, there is an argument about security deficiency as some kinds of dress do not allow the identification of their wearers by law enforcement officers. We know that security measures are continuously tightened in many Western countries in the context of the fight against terror and terrorism, but while trying to address deficiencies in the fight against terrorism, human rights abuses may arise. Therefore, a contradiction appears between the concepts of security and liberty.
As the Middle East and Asia are considered the regions where global terror originated, there is the subconscious belief in some Western people's minds that Muslim immigrants are potential terrorists. However, the recent terror attack in Spain was carried out by people who originated from France. Even if the latter claimed that it gave the necessary information to Spain, Madrid denied this, but what is important is that this attack was committed by terrorists who were neither women nor Muslim.
The burqa debate allowed the French public to discuss different aspects of this complicated issue. President Nicolas Sarkozy has proposed setting up a commission in order to study the extent of those wearing burqas in the country. At the same time, research was released about the number of women wearing burqas in France, where 5 million Muslims live, and the number was only 367. So newspapers have started asking what the point of creating a law that will concern fewer than 400 people is.
We knew already that national intelligence agencies are closely observing religious groups active in their countries. Now we know that they are even observing people's dress. This reminds me of other countries where people were that closely followed: Bulgaria under communist rule, where the number of Turkish speakers was counted, and in Turkey, which tried to find out the number of people speaking Kurdish, Greek or Armenian. It is very well known how authoritarian regimes treat their citizens; there is no need to talk about it in detail.
Why has this subject now come to the forefront of the political agenda in France? Has the number of Muslim women citizens in France wearing burqas been increasing inexorably or is their number is stable while they go out more often? Nonetheless, even if there is a critical situation disturbing the society and this uneasiness is proven by research, creating legislation will not resolve anything, because the issue is not about numbers, it is about mentalities. Let us hope that these debates make everyone, Muslim or not, think thoroughly about civil liberties and rights.
