‘Kılıçdaroğlu’s recent headscarf promise stillborn’

    “I promise that the CHP will make the headscarf free. The prime minister will see. He could not manage it, but we will,” the CHP leader pledged during a party rally last week. He was targeting Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan over a past failure to allow women to wear the headscarf on university campuses, probably hoping that the public has already forgotten about the fact that it was the CHP that obstructed a parliamentary bill that would have lifted the ban. Upon the order of Kılıçdaroğlu, some CHP members are now examining the “roots” of the headscarf problem and are to compile their suggestions for the solution of the issue in a report.  Recent remarks from Party Council member Professor Sencer Ayata, however, showed that the CHP’s attempt to solve the headscarf problem is doomed to fail because the party is still too far from understanding the essential spirit of the matter.

“If you want to solve a problem, you may find by-roads to take you to the solution. We may reach a compromise in the style of covering the head. It is not a must to cover the entire hair in the traditional style,” he said, hinting that female students may be allowed to enter university courses if they agree to make parts of their hair visible. He indicated that such a style would obstruct the use of the headscarf as a political symbol. Ayata also added that the CHP would consult religious leaders about the issue.

Ayata’s remarks were a clear indication that the CHP still believes that the headscarf is worn as a political symbol, rather than for religious reasons, and its use in the public sphere may damage secularism.

Fatma Benli, a lawyer and human rights activist, said the CHP’s promise to solve the headscarf problem is promising, and that heavier responsibility falls on the shoulders of the main opposition party than other political parties, as it obstructed parliamentary efforts to settle the problem in 2008.

“Turning a blind eye to the headscarf problem and continuous human rights violations stemming from this problem do not eliminate the existence of covered women in society. Therefore, we should enable the use of individual rights by covered women instead of ignoring their existence. What is significant is the settlement of the headscarf problem, not by whom the problem is settled,” she noted.

According to Benli, Ayata’s suggestion that women not be allowed to cover all of their hair is “tragicomic.” “You may believe that a hair style does not suit a woman. But you cannot force her to cut her hair for this reason. You cannot tell her that she will not be allowed to enter a school if she refuses to cut her hair. This is the same case for the headscarf. This is not something others are supposed to decide on,” she emphasized. She added that deciding on what covered women will wear as the headscarf is a violation of their free will.

Star daily columnist Ergun Babahan agreed, and said he does not believe that Ayata’s approach to the issue will bring success to the main opposition party.

“Ayata has suggested that a part of the covered women’s hair be visible as the solution to the headscarf problem. This is a kind of intervention into individual choices. Just as the state has no right to interfere with a woman who prefers to wear low-cut trousers, it cannot interfere with women’s choices about the headscarf,” he wrote in a column last week.

The headscarf ban applies to certain public and government offices and locations in Turkey. The ban affects university students as well as those working in the public sector. Women wearing headscarves are not allowed to enter Turkish military facilities, including hospitals and recreational areas belonging to the military. The CHP, unfortunately, has a bad record in its approach to the headscarf issue.

In 2008 Parliament passed a constitutional amendment package that would have lifted the ban on wearing headscarves on university campuses. The CHP appealed the package to the Constitutional Court, which eventually annulled the package. A few months later, then-party leader Deniz Baykal accepted women who wore the chador into the party ranks. The new members, however, resigned from the party before long, arguing that the CHP administration was not sincere in its approach to the headscarf issue.

In addition, in March of this year a group of CHP supporters publicly ripped up several black chadors, arguing that the chador does not conform to the principles of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder of the Turkish Republic.

The chador is widely used as both traditional and religious attire in Anatolia.

According to Ahmet Faruk Ünsal, president of the Association of Human Rights and Solidarity for Oppressed Peoples (MAZLUM-DER), the headscarf problem in Turkey stems from the fact that the CHP believes it has the right to interfere with people’s attire. “I fear the main opposition party will start interfering with people’s undergarments. Women can cover their hair in the way their faiths order them. The CHP has no right to act like municipal police with people’s attire,” he said.

Turkey’s ban on headscarves in universities dates back to the 1980s, but it was significantly tightened after Feb. 28, 1997, when military generals ousted a government they deemed too Islamist. There is no law that bans the use of the headscarf in the public sphere, but the ban makes itself visible in practice.

Turkey was recently slammed by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women due to the headscarf ban. The committee emphasized that the ban on the headscarf has a negative effect on women’s participation in the public field and access to education, employment, healthcare and political influence, and called on Turkey to end its discrimination against covered women.

Covered women distrustful of CHP on headscarf issue

A large number of covered women who were accepted by Baykal into the party ranks before the March 2009 municipal elections say the main opposition party is seeking political gains through its renewed pledge to solve the headscarf problem.

Most believe the CHP is hoping to urge conservative voters to vote against a constitutional amendment package in the Sept. 12 referendum with the headscarf pledge. “The referendum is approaching, and the CHP is investing in it. The CHP pledge to settle the headscarf issue is aimed to garner more ‘no’ votes in the referendum,” noted Emine Öztürk, who was honored by the former CHP leader with a party badge last year. Öztürk became a party member then, but resigned before long after she saw that the CHP was reluctant to keep its promises to conservative voters.

Another former CHP member, Selma Kavak -- who wears the chador -- expressed anger with Ayata for his “radical suggestion” related to the headscarf.

“I do not think the CHP is sincere in its pledge for covered women. The rules for covering women’s hair are obvious,” she said, listing a number of the CHP’s past failures to keep its promises to conservative voters. “The party appealed a parliamentary bill aimed at lifting the headscarf ban to the Constitutional Court. And a group of CHP supporters publicly tore chadors into pieces. We were hopeful when Baykal honored us with party badges and accepted us into the CHP. But in time we unfortunately saw that the party was not sincere in its pledges,” Kavak added.