HUMA RAJA

Mainstream media often labels Muslim women wearing a niqab as oppressed, but far more oppressive is the banning of a woman’s freedom to wear her niqab in a public space.

Niqabs are veils worn by many females in Islam that cover all but the eyes. In December 2011, former immigration minister Jason Kenney issued a policy manual for Canadian citizenship regulations, which included removing any kind of face covering when taking the public citizenship oath. The ban was part of a series of moves that attempted to strengthen Canadian citizenship policies.

In 2013, a Muslim woman from Pakistan named Zunera Ishaq was the first to challenge the ban in Canada after her husband had sponsored her to come to Canada in 2008.

Before Ishaq gave her citizenship test, she removed her niqab in front of an official. Ishaq passed her test, but was not granted citizenship; she was unable to attend the oath ceremony since participants were banned from wearing niqabs. 

A court ruling in February struck down the ban, citing it as unlawful. However, shortly after the court’s decision, the Canadian government decided it would make an appeal. Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the niqab “anti-women,” against Canadian values of transparency and a roadblock for identification.

All these reasons are laughable. Prior to the citizenship ceremony, the government knows an applicant’s residential history, work history and personal history. Biographical information of relatives is also collected. Clearly, applicants undergoing the citizenship process adhere to a high level of transparency.

As far as the niqab being “anti-women” and oppressive, on March 16 Ishaq said to the Toronto Star that, “It’s precisely because I won’t listen to how other people want me to live my life that I wear a niqab. Some of my own family members have asked me to remove it. I have told them that I prefer to think for myself.” Ishaq made it clear that she wears the niqab proudly and by her own choice.

For those who claim the niqab ban is about identity verification, would-be citizens provide several proofs of identity before the final ceremonial oath and even after that their signature is required to confirm they’ve taken the oath.

In the Toronto Star Ishaq also said, “I have taken my niqab off for security and identity reasons […] such as when I have taken a driver’s licence photo or gone through airport security. I will take my niqab off again before the oath ceremony without protest so I can be properly identified.”

Politicians and media race to manipulate the niqab, drawing upon ignorance, discrimination and Islamophobia to increase support for the ban. Sadly, this anti-Islamic propaganda affects Muslim women. As a Muslim, I feel offended when society constantly claims that I’m oppressed, insisting that I must be forced to cover my body.

This ridiculous suggestion — along with other media-enforced stereotypes and misinformation — make deep impressions on society. Some people cannot meet a Muslim woman without associating her with negative media stories. When I meet a new person, my headscarf automatically does half the talking — but whether it says I’m oppressed or empowered might depend on the media opinion of the day.

If the niqab can’t be worn at citizenship ceremonies, who’s to say that ban won’t one day extend to universities or other public areas? Who’s to say that it won’t fuel discrimination and misunderstandings on Canadian campuses in the future? Banning the niqab will definitely have a domino effect that will trickle down to the student population.

The niqab ban is not for the sake of security, secularism or gender equality. I don’t want to bare my body for the scrutiny and entertainment of men in order to prove that I’m equal. Who’s to say that one day, women won’t be forced to dress down even more because that’s the government’s way of upholding equality?

A niqab ban would embody the description niqab-opposers attach to the garment itself: anti-women, closed-minded and oppressive.