HEADSCARF VERDICT LIKELY TO GENERATE NEW

UNCLAS FRANKFURT 008335 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/AGS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PHUM PGOV GM SUBJECT: HEADSCARF VERDICT LIKELY TO GENERATE NEW RESTRICTIONS ON RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION REF: 98 Frankfurt 6465; 00 Frankfurt 3078; 01 Frankfurt 6028 ¶1. SUMMARY: In a landmark decision, the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe ruled September 24 that Fereshta Ludin (a German teacher of Afghan descent) may teach in a public school without removing her headscarf, but strengthened the authority of German states to regulate religious expression. Based on early media coverage, most states in SW Germany appear set to restrict religious expression by public employees. In a five-to-three decision, the judges decided that while the plaintiff may wear her headscarf under the current Baden-Wuerttemberg constitution, state parliaments may pass laws regulating or forbidding the practice in schools. Commentators predicted a new wave of restrictive laws, and complained that the mixed verdict will lead to more legal challenges. END SUMMARY. ¶2. In 1998, Fereshta Ludin (a teacher and German citizen from Afghanistan) applied for a position with civil servant status at a public school in Stuttgart (Baden-Wuerttemberg / B-W). When Ludin stated that her Muslim religious beliefs require her to wear a headscarf during classroom instruction, the Stuttgart Office of Education rejected her candidacy. In February 1999, Ludin filed a complaint at the Administrative Court in Stuttgart, which rejected her case in March 2000. In follow-on appeals, the B-W State Administrative Court and the Federal Administrative Court in Berlin upheld the decision against Ludin, emphasizing the necessity of maintaining neutrality and the right of pupils not to be exposed to religious symbols (reftels). ¶3. In its current decision, Germany's highest court framed the issue as a conflict between the need for neutrality in public schools and freedoms of religion and employment. The majority held that the German Basic Law grants states far- reaching authority over education, including the power to regulate religious symbols and conditions of employment. The court held that state legislatures have the power to strike the balance between religious freedom and neutrality towards students. Under the new verdict, community traditions and the religious make-up of the population are legitimate considerations, and various states may legislate different solutions. The court returned the Ludin case to the Federal Administrative Court in Berlin, which can compel B-W to give Ludin a teaching certificate or can wait until the B-W state parliament enacts legislation (most likely a ban on headscarves for public school teachers). ¶4. In a minority opinion, the dissenting judges argued that wearing a headscarf violates the neutrality required of civil servants. The minority criticized also the court's insufficient guidance to the B-W state government on how to proceed until a new law is passed. ¶5. Local political leaders reacted cautiously to the verdict. B-W Minister President Erwin Teufel (CDU - Christian Democratic Union) and Education Minister Annette Schavan (CDU) said only that they would carefully study the Karlsruhe decision. All four parties in the B-W state parliament (CDU, SPD - Social Democrats, FDP - Free Democrats, and Greens),however, announced they would move quickly to pass legislation requiring neutrality in public schools (i.e., against headscarves). Islamic leaders and human rights advocates criticized the verdict. The chairman of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, Nadeem Elyas, complained that the court did not guarantee the rights of Muslim women and indicated that Muslims will continue fighting restrictions. ¶6. COMMENT: The Fereshta Ludin verdict has opened the door for state parliaments to restrict religious expression in public employment. Conservative governments in Baden- Wuerttemberg, Hesse, Saarland, and Bavaria, as well as the leftist government of Berlin, have announced that they will enact laws to ban the wearing of headscarves by public school teachers (Munich 0924). Legislators in Rheinland- Pfalz (SPD-FDP),on the other hand, have indicated that they will not ban the practice. Because the verdict upheld Ludin's right (for the moment) to wear a headscarf, a few conservative politicians have used the occasion to criticize the court's earlier "crucifix verdict" which requires schools to remove crosses from classroom walls if so requested. Judging from media coverage, many non-Muslims in Germany appear unsympathetic to Ludin's cause, regarding it as an issue of professional duty rather than religious freedom. The mixed verdict is likely to mean more lawsuits in those states that enact bans. END COMMENT. BODDE