header-logo header-logo

24 May 2007 / Barbara Hewson
Issue: 7274 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Visible justice

Veils in court are an affront to open justice, says Barbara Hewson

The Judicial Studies Board (JSB) issued its draft document on the wearing of veils in court late last month. The accompanying press release from the Judicial Communications Office states:

“The JSB has stressed that it is very interested in receiving comments on the detail of the guidance—which is (as with all such guidance) subject to review.”

One wonders why the JSB is so reluctant to hold a proper consultation on the issue among the legal profession and court users generally.
The guidance is not concerned with the headscarf hijab, the commonest form of “veiling” among Muslim women living in Western societies, which consists of covering the hair and neck. The JSB is talking principally about the niqab, or full-face veil, worn by a tiny minority of Muslim women in this country, which has a slit for the eyes but otherwise entirely conceals the woman’s face, head and hair. There is also the burqa, the most radical form of veiling. This is

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Jean-François Le Gal

Penningtons Manches Cooper—Jean-François Le Gal

Penningtons Manches Cooper strengthens international disputes team with appointment of leading arbitration partner

Shakespeare Martineau—Aaron Sanders & Kate Saunders

Shakespeare Martineau—Aaron Sanders & Kate Saunders

Shakespeare Martineau strengthens trust and estates disputes team with new appointments

Bellevue Law—Shannon Moore

Bellevue Law—Shannon Moore

Bellevue Law strengthens employment disputes and international advisory capability with senior associate appointment

NEWS
The Thirlwall Inquiry has exposed a ‘complete failure’ to protect babies at the Countess of Chester Hospital, but its recommendations must now be put into practice
When does a solicitor’s retainer become a contentious business agreement? The Court of Appeal’s decision in Broadfield Law UK LLP v Barnes shows that listing hourly rates alone will not do, leaving firms and clients uncertain about their rights over bills
A divorced woman has secured funding to participate in her former husband’s inquest after the Legal Aid Agency reconsidered repeated refusals
More than 500 former rugby players can pursue brain injury claims despite serious failures to disclose documents ordered by the High Court
MPs cannot simply resign their Commons seats. Instead, they take a nominal Crown office, usually the Chiltern Hundreds or Manor of Northstead, which disqualifies them from sitting
back-to-top-scroll