The EU is moving closer to supporting a ban on the Islamic headscarf and other religious symbols in the workplace and in educational settings
The ban on wearing the Islamic veil in the workplace may be justified, without constituting discrimination, according to the Advocate General of the European Union.,
Juliane Kokott, who states that "religion is something that, unlike sex or ethnic origin, can be left in the closet when you start working.".
On May 31, the Court of Justice of the European Union published its conclusions, which will define what will be the first ruling on this matter. The final verdict will be announced soon, at a time when the European debate on the integration of refugees of Muslim origin is more open than ever.
The case to be decided is that of Samira Achbita, a Belgian citizen and receptionist at the security company GS4, who expressed her intention to wear the Islamic veil. The company prohibits its employees from displaying religious, political, and philosophical symbols, and dismissed her. With the support of the Belgian Center for Equal Opportunities and the Fight Against Racism, she appealed, and when the case reached the Court of Cassation, it decided to refer the matter to the EU.
Kokott believes the measure “cannot be considered direct discrimination” as long as it applies to all types of religious symbols: the Sikh turban, the Jewish kippah, the Christian crucifix, or even a T-shirt with the slogan “Jesus loves you,” he says. At the company G4S, the rule extends to signs of political or philosophical beliefs, so it affects religious and atheist workers equally.
Thus, in this case, he does not see "less favorable treatment" directly linked to religion.
“It is legitimate to opt for a policy of strict neutrality,” as long as it is not used as a mechanism of indirect discrimination and this policy affects everyone equally.
In short, it seems the EU is suggesting that religion is more of an “aspect of private life” than an invariable condition. Workers cannot leave their sex, skin color, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, age, or disability in the cloakroom when entering the employer's premises, but they can be required to exercise a certain degree of modesty at work regarding the practice of their religion and their political beliefs. This principle will be applied proportionally: small, discreet symbols will be more acceptable than those that cover the head, for example. The rule may be stricter if the worker is required to wear a uniform, or the greater their degree of direct contact with customers.
The European jurist recommends evaluating each case individually, seeking “a fair balance between all conflicting interests” and all relevant circumstances of the specific case, as well as taking into account the national identity of each country, in this case Belgium. The judges of the Court of Justice are now beginning their deliberations on the matter. Generally, in three out of four cases, they are guided by the opinion of the Advocate General.