A MUSLIM woman has been told that she must remove her full-face veil when she gives evidence but can wear it at other times during her trial, a judge has ruled at Blackfriars crown court in London. Judge Peter Murphy’s compromise ruling will set a significant precedent for how courts deal with witnesses and defendants who insist on wearing a niqab.

The 22-year-old woman from London, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, says it is against her religious beliefs to show her face in public. She pleaded not guilty to a charge of intimidation last week while wearing a veil.

The judge had warned that she would have to show her face to be properly identified. However, he backed down last Thursday (Sept 5) and permitted her to enter the dock after she had been identified in a private room by a female police officer.

The Metropolitan police constable, who was present when the defendant was photographed following her arrest in June, then swore on oath that she was in the dock.

A niqab covers the face, with a slit for the eyes. It is commonly worn in the Saudi Arabian peninsula and many other Muslim countries.

The woman’s barrister, Susan Meek, had argued it would breach her human rights and be counter to Britain’s tolerance of Islamic dress if she had to remove her veil against her wishes during the trial.

“She is entitled to wear it in private and in public,” Meek said last week. “That right to wear the niqab also extends to the courtroom. There is no legislation in the UK in respect of the wearing of the niqab. There is no law in this country banning it.

“The jury will be able to determine her demeanour while wearing the veil. Demeanour is not just how their mouth moves, it is how their head moves, their eyes move, their hands move. That will be fully visible to the jury and no bar to her giving evidence.” The judgment came on the day the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, said that he did not believe it was “appropriate” for students to wear a full veil in the classroom or for people to go through airport security with their faces covered.

Clegg told the BBC: “I think it is very un-British to start telling people what pieces of clothing they should wear. I think there are exceptions to that as far as the full veil is concerned — security at airports, for instance. It is perfectly reasonable for us to say the full veil is clearly not appropriate there. “And I think in the classroom, there is an issue of course about teachers being able to address their students in a way where they can address them face to face. I think it is quite difficult in the classroom to be able to do that.”

The Home Office minister Jeremy Browne earlier called for a national debate on whether the state should step in to prevent young women having the veil imposed upon them.

That intervention was sparked by a row over the decision by Birmingham Metropolitan College to drop a ban on the wearing of full-face veils. Browne said he was “instinctively uneasy” about restricting religious freedoms, but he added there may be a case to act to protect girls who were too young to decide for themselves whether they wished to wear the veil or not.

By arrangement with the Guardian