More like this
Rich Muslim vows to pay all French burka fines
Flamboyant Rachid Nekkaz pledges €1m to pay fines of French Muslim women caught wearing the full veil
On the eve of tomorrow's Bastille Day celebrations, there is more revolution in the air in France and this time the ringleader is a flamboyant Muslim businessman called Rachid Nekkaz. The 38-year-old property developer is incensed that France has moved one step closer to banning the burka, with women caught wearing the full veil in public liable to a €150 fine and anyone convicted of forcing a woman to cover up facing a fine of up to €30,000 and a year in prison.
The first stage in passing the controversial law was today approved in the National Assembly with members of the Lower House voting overwhelmingly – 335 votes for to one against – to introduce the ban. If the French senators in the Upper House ratify the proposal in September, it will become law by the spring of 2011.
Nekkaz (above), along with the majority of France's five million Muslims, is furious at what he sees as a persecution of his religion, pointing out that fewer than 2,000 French Muslims actually wear the full veil.
He has begun a campaign to fight the law and he's pledged one million euros of his own money to pay the fines of any Muslim convicted. Speaking outside the National Assembly, Nekkaz said: "One million sounds a lot, but to protect one's liberty it's not much, and I hope that others in this country who hold the constitution dear and want to protect our fundamental liberty will join me in fighting this law."
The debonair Nekkaz, a shining example of an integrated, modern French Muslim (he was born in France to Algerian parents), has set up a campaign group called 'Hands off my Constitution', and plans to raise the €1m by selling some of the properties he owns in the Parisian suburbs.
In front of the cameras he wrote a personal cheque for the seven-figure sum before describing the proposed law as 'Anti-Constitutional' and demanding that President Sarkozy shelves the idea.
That seems unlikely. Not only has Sarkozy described the full veil as degrading to women, but it's an issue that has the overwhelming support of his UMP party. Justice Minister Michele Alliot-Marie said last week that wearing the veil "amounted to being cut off from society and rejecting the very spirit of the French republic that is founded on a desire to live together''.
And the likes of Nekkaz haven't been helped in fighting the law by the muddled approach of the opposition Socialist Party. They would like to see a ban restricted to state institutions. But that notion was ridiculed by Alliot-Marie, who said it would be "legally incoherent" and impossible to enforce. "How could we convince the French people that freedom, equality and respect for the dignity of women begins in the train station but stops at the exit?''
The Socialists abstained in today's vote in the Lower House and have said they will adopt a similar stance in September's Senate vote, in which case it seems certain the law will be written into the French Constitution. But the country's police force is bracing itself for a backlash. Security was increased at the National Assembly ahead of today's vote and there are fears of street riots if the bill is passed. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
to all the idiots bragging about culture and religion ! why is it that when Muslim women wear a veil to cover their head, they need to be stopped and "WHEN A CHRISTIAN NUN DOES THE SAME, SHE IS MODEST ?" its Muslim women choice to cover their hair or face or whatever they want. ITS IN UR CHRISTIAN FAITH AND BIBLE THAT WOMEN MUST COVER THEIR HEAD AND FACE LIKE NUNS ! what problem do you have when it comes to Islam ? they do it by their choice, u dnt knw about Islam, go and research 1st. the govt. is getting into ppls personal life
@Johny Heartbreaker: I understand your constituents may give you authority in a political debate, but who made you an authority on what is and is not "tribal"? What is and is not being forced upon Muslim women? What is and is not "true equality"? You talk of Rights and Civil Liberties....are you from the same Labour party that actively supported the Iraq war over and above the actual report as per UN inspectors that there are no WMDs and hence no credibility for a war? Are you from the same Labour that led UK to attack a sovereign nation, circumventing the guidelines set out by a league of nations to prevent injustice in the "21st century"? So much for "rights and liberties". I am "thinking", thankyou very much, and something tells me very clearly who the enemy of "human rights and civil liberties" here is.
@Johnny Heartbreaker: Your argument that it is archaic is invalid as democracy is archaic.
Also you have NO PROOF OR EVIDENCE that those that decide to cover their faces do so out of pressure from males. There are no statistics to back that claim.
As per the security threat, there is no evidence or proof that the face veil is for security purposes either as it hasn't been proven a security threat. Many airports get female staff to see the faces of the covered women and there's no fuss.
Lastly, for those people who ask, "Why doesn't he wear one himself?" Well if Nike trainers were banned hypothetically, many people don't wear Nikes for personal choice. It does not mean we think the ban is unreasonable.
He may be rich and everything but the point is that he's making the French government richer for imposing the ban! This serves no purpose, actually!
Something must be done about this law.
This is such a mess in the name of security..nation..laws..whatever left ...if any politician wants to make his way up thn its target is religion...shame on u all for making such excuses ..as for freedom..modernization....liberties..kindly attend to the women children in ur religion, country..dont need to mention that the rate of injustice in such democratic countries is alarming..and hidden..if u can apply so much brains, power, politics to ban clothes thn use a little for those who r underprivileged, poor, in need of medical attention,
and my last word LIVE AND LET LIVE
As a Socialist and member of the UK's Labour Party myself, unlike the French Socialists, I won't beat around the bush with regards to where I stand on this whole issue: well done France for taking such a brave stand. The Burkha is both archaic and part of TRIBAL custom only. It has NO place in the 21st Century - and free will would be fine if Islamic females from extremist/ fundamentalist families/communities were actually given genuine and total free will and access to BOTH choices: to wear or not to wear. The reality is however that they are not. Rachid Nekkaz and his ilk are Islam's biggest threat to modernisation and TRUE equality between all of it's members. Ironic that they live in a country built upon such Socialist values. Yet seek to deny such values and Human Rights & Civil Liberties from their own women and children! Think people think - and stop being so scared of being labelled an Islamophobe or Racist. Stand up and voice your opinion. After all, whether in France or the UK, it's EVERYBODY's right. Nes pas?!
Takbeers!!!
Nekkaz is such an inspiration! I'm humbled. This man's defense of Islam/the veil is jihad on so many levels! It disgusts me, to say the least, to see governments/power-trippin' people prosecute Others simply because they do not live by their ideologies of "freedom." For one, consider the stats on Violence against Women in populations that adapt to Western ideologies of freedom, ie. "if you've got it, flaunt it." There's nothing freeing or safe even about going Hijab-less and dressing down to mainstream norms. Stats also prove that muslim women who embrace Islamic veiling are less likely the victims of harassment/violence/harm etc. The Islamic dress code for both genders is a choice that grants protection, liberation, respect, individuality & self-worth... May God preserve Nekkaz's spirit and all that is the Muslim identity globally. Ameen!
Well, if he wants to pay it, LET HIM! France will become richer!
y do we fite.
Priests and nuns were requested by the Holy Father John XXIII to do just as you ask - about fifty years ago. Many do indeed wear modern dress and mix openly in society. Clearly you and I will not agree about Modernism so why fite (sic) over it?
Barry Larking-Modernism is incompatible with belng 'truly Moslem' then y dont nuns and priest modernise, wear a modern suite?? or a skirt n long coat?????
Have you ever asked a Muslim women, how does she feel of the Hijab(veil). Here is a beautiful answer by Mr Dawud Warnsby,Do read it with an unbiased heart.
THE VEIL
They say, "Oh, poor girl, you're so beautiful you know
It's a shame that you cover up your beauty so."
She just smiles and graciously responds reassuringly,
"This beauty that I have is just a simple part of me.
This body that I have, no stranger has a right to see.
These long clothes, this shawl I wear, ensure my modesty.
Faith is more essential than fashion, wouldn't you agree?"
This hijab,
This mark of piety,
Is an act of faith, a symbol,
For all the world to see.
A simple cloth, topreserve her dignity.
So lift the veil from your heart to see the heart of purity.
They tell her, "Girl, don't you know this is the West and you are free?
You don't need to be oppressed, ashamed of your femininity."
She just shakes her head and she speaks so assuredly,
"See the bill-boards and the magazines that line the check-out isles,
with their phony painted faces and their air-brushed smiles?
Well their sheer clothes and low cut gowns they are in, really not for me.
You call it freedom, I call it anarchy."
This hijab,
This mark of piety,
Is an act of faith, a symbol,
For all the world to see.
A simple cloth, to preserve her dignity.
So lift the veil from your heart to see the heart of purity.
Lift the veil from your heart and seek the heart of purity.
france has majority of christian followers ..do theygo to churches? do french ppl believe in jesus? or holy mother marry??? all muslims believe in mother marry n jesus 100%, if they dont they r nt muslims...
coming to christians..do they see with their own eyes wats the dress code given to mother marry?? is she wearing jeans or top??? is she wearing a skirt??? or a long coat????? ne answers...i think she is a women of great importance in both the faiths...her robe covers her from top to bottom... does it not?? did her husband force her??? or son force her??? or is the french govt forcing her to wear tht robe which covers her head her body her legs???? isnt tht tooooo covering ..against french law??? will she also be fined to wear a modest dresssss?????? then y a women who chooses to wear some thing of her own called suprresed??? y all the nuns in church cover themselves isnt tht oppressing..no its religion tht asks them to cover..them y muslims cant do wat they r asked for....???????????? or may be its against the fasion nation.....i think ppl need to think of themselves first... its okay fr a nun to cover her self but nt okay fr a muslim to do it. double standards!!!!!1
The French decision to proceed with a ban on the all over clothing worn by some Moslem women - a few, not all - is designed to aid integration and acceptance. It is not anti-Moslem. The injunction against women being distinctive, neither face nor body outline, is an injunction placed upon adult females from certain tribal traditions. It is not 'Moslem', any more than trousers or headscarves. The French are concerned about where the spread of this 'custom' is going. There is as yet no ban on headscarves - the head covering of choice among women when I was growing up in London sixty years ago. Later, I lived in an area of high Moslem immigration in a northern English town. Until recently I never saw such a garment. It is now fairly common. I noticed in television interviews with wearers in London the women were (as far as could tell) young and British accented. The wearing of this garment is clearly intended in their eyes (though some wore sunglasses also) as a riposte against Modernist society which they reject since Modernism is incompatible with belng 'truly Moslem'. This is s spurious. To be compliant would require not going out at all, since to do so in a western setting is to be confronted on all sides by imagery and scenes so against Moslem belief as they hold it to be, that offence is unavoidable and continuous. It is not the French rejection of the covering of women (can one think of a less people less amenable to this act than the French?) but the rejection of France and its values, modern life and the plural society by wearers - who need to be seen for this to take effect. The gentleman should find better uses for his money.
what a travesty of justice to those who does nothing to harm others but are trying to express their so called freedom. Can u answer when are u banning the Christian nuns from wearing head scarfs, priests from wearing their robs and Sikhs from wearing the turban. i am sure u have no answers.you guys call yourself democratic,but in real sense your those who respect none but your selfish desires.
Allah(SWT) is all wise and all merciful and he is the one who knows what is hidden and what is apparent. Dont forget you have to face the Almighty one day, prepare an answer for that very day.And for sure you will not be able to get away from the hell fire lest you repent in this world.
May Allah(SWT) be with those who are struggling for their basic rights. Dear all sisters Allah(SWT) will grant you great rewards for your struggle inshallah.Amen
Luigi, I've spent most of my life working with and around Muslims (men and women) and they have worn whatever they've wished to all their lives. Given the CONTEXT of this article and series of comments. When I said 'why cant muslim women wear a modest top and jeans' I obviously was refering to the fraction of them (mostly from Saudi, Iran as you said, and perhaps afghanistan) who DO wear the Burka. Why aren't they entitled to the freedom other muslims are? You said that no state or governemnt should have the power to dictate what people should or should not wear and doing so is fascism. You obviously think that statement of yours doesn't apply to SHARIA LAW - Where people are told what to wear, eat and how to behave under the threat of death. That's not fascism at all is it? You also mention people wishing to and choosing to wear the burka. Is it really a matter of choice? or is it social pressure from their families and community? Or as TomNightingale pointed out - 'Just because Muslims (and others) do not believe their religion is oppressive does not mean it isn't. It just means they have been so thoroughly indoctrinated they cannot see it'. If women who choose to wear the burka do so because of a deep personal choice and is an exercise of their freedom, tell me, why do muslim men never choose to wear a burka? I mean, it must have clear benefits if you put it on out of choice? Or tell me this - why do some women who, when free of their local law or families take the burka off? If putting it on in the first place was a matter of choice then this shouldn't happen. You can sugar coat the burka issue with shouts of freedom and choice but it is what it is - a misogynistic tool that hides a woman's voice and identity for the simple fact that she is a woman. If this unjust and freedom curtailing law (as you say it) is passed, by all means people have the right to oppose it and fight for what they believe is right. You're lucky that France will ALLOW you to protest this. It's a shame that people (muslim and non muslim) who believe in personal freedom can't protest freedom curtailing law in Islamic countries. They aren't even ALLOWED to. This is what makes my blood boil - it's always a double standard. Where does fascism really thrive?
@ Jason Racvand: I can see what point you are trying to make, but I believe you should take a much closer look at what you are writing. You said: "Visitors to those countries don't do it due to respect for local law," when referring to the kissing ban in muslim countries. The key word I want you to look at here is visitors. The muslims who are being affected by this ban are the ones who live in France. They are citizens, not visitors. They have a home and a life in France whereas the visitors you mentioned don't make a life in these Muslim countries. Another idea I want you to think about is what exactly you (as well as other people, but I address you because you seem like a reasonable person) are comparing. You are comparing kissing, an action, to what you wear, which usually makes a statement about your personality and who you are as an individual (Paris is a notable fashion capital, the French should know this better than anyone lol). Walking in the street and looking around you, you can identify a persons personality by what they wear (be it sloppy, sporty, glamorous, and in this case religous). Is it right to strip someone of what helps make a person who they are? Finally, addressing the modesty comment about tops and jeans: I truly hope you do not sincerely think that every muslim woman wears a burka, because this is light years from the truth. I am a muslim girl living near Washington D.C. and I do wear modest tops and jeans. I also wear hijab (not the burka but a scarf that covers my hair). I do this because it is my own choice. My father nor any other man in my life has ever forced me to do this. It is pure faith and devotion that makes me want to do this as it is for most of the women in France wearing the burka. Yes the burka is not mandatory; however, most women do it because they want to be as modest as possible (because modesty IS extremely important in Islam) and they want to become closer to God. Now I ask you this: is it fair to try and take away that connection that is so sacred to your fellow human beings?
And to everybody else who is reading and anybody who is for this ban: First of all, thank you for still giving this post your attention, I beg of you to continue. Second of all, from what I read in most the comments, it seems that the main concern you all have is that it takes away a woman's freedom and degrades them. Now I am not going to lie to you, there are men out there who are pigs and beat their women and force their women to do things. But this is the case in every single religion, culture, country, civilization you name it. And as I said earlier, there are many women who do burka out of their own choice. It is there own "pursuit of happiness" that is being taken away by them. A
Also I would like to point out that by banning something related to religion/faith (which does not follow religious freedom), France loses its right to call itself a secular country
Jason Racvand. I tell u where u r wrong & right.
(1) YOU ARE UTTERLY WRONG, when you say 'why cant muslim women wear modest top and jeans'.
You obviously have not visited or worked professionally in muslim countries (excluding Iran & Saudi of course).
If u do so, then perhaps you will have to eat your own words.
It is as ridiculous as someone from the MiddleEast saying "why cant western women wear Long Coats, why are they not allowed to?"
How would you respond to that? Would u not say 'thats stupid, western women do wear long coats, if they want to'
DO YOU GET IT NOW? What u said is ridiculously silly, because many muslim women in muslim countries all
over the world do wear modest top and jeans. I showed your post to female muslim colleague who was born and
raised in a fairly conservative muslim country,
and she couldn't stop laughing at how inaccurate and ignorant your post was.
And I repeat, the level of ignorance n prejudice on this post column is simply shocking. I feel as though I am explaining things to 5 year olds.
(2) The point I made about Nudists was not ridiculous. An extreme example to illustrate a fair point, which is:
NO GOVT OR STATE AUTHORITY SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO DICTATE TO A GROUP OF PEOPLE, WHAT THEY SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT WEAR. This is fascism full stop.
Whatever your feelings about Burka, if someone wishes & CHOOSES to wear it, then who the hell are we or the Govt, to tell them not to wear it?
This is a gross infringement of personal freedom. Surely you must recognise this.
(3) Your retort to Danny's point, is fair, and I can see that point of view.
(4) I also accept your last point. The law is the law. If the law against Burka is passed, then it must be obeyed by visting muslims.
But that does not mean that this unjust and freedom curtailing law should be not opposed by us who believe in personal freedom.
Luigi Sasso wrote '...sexual intercourse in public is an offence in this country and liable for criminal prosecution.'
You're totally wrong Mr Sasso - if the act is carried out and the public can find another way to pass by without seeing the act there is no offence.
For instance, in a field - no offence.
In a subway - an offence.
As for your views on calling all and sundry bigots I think you need to relax a little. Personally when I look at how certain females actually flaunt themselves in public, willingly give birth outside of marriage I am actually encouragd that at least one society has values of modesty and [hopefully] self restraint.
@Luigi Sasso... Muslim attire is defined as any clothing that is modest? Then why can't muslim women wear a 'modest' top and jeans?. I mean, it is modest after all and thus 'muslim attire' as you put it.
Your point about nudists is ridiculous. The burka cannot even be compared to other clothes (that a theoretical nudist party might ban) when it comes to oppression. The burka, as Robin so aptly put is a 'prison for women', a 'tool of sexist domination' and completely misogynistic. It takes away a woman's voice, identity and self esteem. I don't think I need to remind you that other clothes are worn by BOTH sexes.
I think you've missed Danny's point completely. He meant that there is outside tolerance to muslim countries' prosecution of public indecency (such as french kissing or revealing clothing). Visitors to those countries don't do it due to respect for local law. Therefore there should be muslim tolerance to the burka ban in a non muslim country.
You're absolutely right here - [quote]It is ridiculous to demand that muslim nations should tolerate what they see as lewd behaviour, when in Europe, people are still liable for prosecution for what is here defined as lewd behaviour or acts against public decency' [unquote]
However it is equally ridiculous to demand that muslims in a non muslim country shouldn't respect local law and take the burka off when non muslims who visit strict muslim countries give up their values and their preffered style of dress.
Wow.I'm impressed by Mr.Nekkaz's vigor and spirit.Way to go!
Koodoos to this gentleman. I think it is awful that this law is going to come into effect. I also think it is ignorant of people to use the lame excuse of how women are treated in some of the Muslim countries. That has nothing to do with how a democratic nation such as France, or any other country that professes that it is a country found on FREEDOM reacts to wardrobe selection.
You cannot compare two different ideologies to justify taking away the rights of choice and freedom of any woman to decide on one's own wardrobe.
France is not the only country doing this. Why so much fear about the small handful of woman who this law pertains to.
I fear that there is so much fear and ignorance out there that people are going to start believing anything the State tells them ... out of fear for security. What a bunch of BS...don't lay over and take this type of authoritarian power. Stand up for your rights people, or soon enough...they will be gone!
TO ANSWER SOME OF THE IDIOT BIGOTS writing comments:
(1) TomNightwitgale - Forget TV, I have seen in real life not 1 but dozens of English Christian teen girls who get pregnant have 4 kids and claim benefits. The fathers r probably sad white christians who do not understand fatherhood ** - Can u now see what a fool bigot u r Tom?
(2) Maria Elena Gamboa - I find it obnoxious, that u r just plain ignorant. Muslim attire is defined as any clothing that is modest. A Suit with a bow tie, is as much an Islamic dress as is an Arab long robe. Do not confuse religion with regional cultures. If you wish to ban 'muslim' attire, that pretty means banning all clothing. Are you by any chance a Nudist? Perhaps you'll be happy when the Nudist party wins elections, and then legislates to ban all clothing, because (as Nudists) argue, any clothing is a form of oppression. Don't force your views on other people, Maria.
(3) Danny Van der Walt - the same goes for you too! You talk about French kissing in public. Well the last time I checked, sexual intercourse in public is an offence in this country and liable for criminal prosecution. It is ridiculous to demand that muslim nations should tolerate what they see as lewd behaviour, when in Europe, people are still liable for prosecution for what is here defined as lewd behaviour or acts against public decency.
CONCLUSION: Most of the comment posters here, are stupid hypocritical bigots - And of the worse kind. Because they cant see own prejudice, when it come to muslims. Its sickening.
" When in Rome do as the Romans do "
What are the chances a woman visiting a Muslim country in typical Western attire would be allowed? Even Western men arriving in places like Bahrain have restrictions.
I think that alone is what irritates most people about this veil situation - they want it both ways . So may I suggest
When in France do as the French do and black shrouds are not French attire. It is just that simple.
Freedom of religion is a necessity. I support women coming out from under restrictions of a male-dominated religious authority, but on their own with our support, not our imposing of yet another authority. I think this man for standing up for religious freedom.
@Usman Anwar
"then so long as she wants to".
What does "wants to " mean? If it were purely a case of total free will, it might be OK. But can any sane person argue religion is not based on indoctrination? Most ABCists are the children of ABCists. Can anyone sensibly claim that is not indoctrination?
Just because Muslims (and others) do not believe their religion is oppressive does not mean it isn't. It just means they have been so thoroughly indoctrinated they cannot see it. That is how religions survive. It doesn't mean the indoctrinators are evil; just they know no better....effective indoctrination.
If the cover up job is so good for women, why haven't hundreds of millions of non-Muslim women worked it out and covered up? Are they all too dumb?
I saw a young French Muslim woman on TV yesterday. 4 kids. A baby factory for her husband. Lost of sons to prove he is a real man.
I grew up in Aden [South Yemen] when it was a Crown Colony. The Arab ladies there wore the Chador which covered completely, including the eyes.
It wasn't a problem to the British authorities then - and there was ongoing terrorist activities from both FLOSY and the NLF and I really don't see what the problem is in Britain today.
Personally, when I see the way in which some women blatantly flaunt their bodies in public I really wonder why something like a Muslim ladies modest choice of dress seems to have more importance?
Banning the burka just means women will be forced to stay indoors. So much for "Freedom".
If this French Muslim businessman is in favour of the burkah, why is he not dressed in Arab/Muslim attire? I find it compltely obnoxious that Muslim males can wear "Westerm attire" when Muslim women don't. When male Muslims wear so-called Muslim attire, they are in white - to deflect the heat of the sun, whereas Muslim women are in black, which absorbs the heat. If France is going to pass any legisltations then they should bann all Muslim attire, not just the Burkah in black for women!!!!
If there is tolerance shown towards Islamic countries for declaring French kissing in public a crime, the burka ban should be seen in the same light.
Seeing a persons face is part of the western culture. What about the criminals who have fled Britain dressed in the Burka? It needs to be banned in Britain also and sooner the better.
I see "Robert Boyd" displays the illiteracy traditionally associated with the lunatic rightwing nutters. Amazing his post got past the Moderators, really?
Finally a country with the cojones to face up to the insidious non-muslim subjugation of women by, I quote an enlightened Imam "a tiny minority tradition reflecting an ideology that undermines the Muslim religion. The burka is a prison for women, a tool of sexist domination and Islamist indoctrination".
If the Muslim faith wants to be seen as a true all embracing faith that truly treats ALL men and women as of equal stature then it has to ditch these non-Koranic misogynistic ideas for what they actually are - the deliberate subjugation of women by insecure. immature, ill-educated, persons of the male persuasion. I hesitate to call them 'men' as that would raise them to the same level as real men who value the opposite sex for what they are - fellow human beings....
Just because this idiot has money doesn't make his views any less reprehensible...
Why does'nt he where a Burka himself and set an example? Nah to degrading,just pay to keep 'em down!
This is a success.. for the anti islamic brigade. amnesty international say it's an attack on the rights of an individual. if a girl, islamic or otherwise, doesn't want to be perved on by men, then so long as she wants to, why shouldn't she cover her face by a burka.. Why does the state intervene to tell women what she can and can't wear?. Stick the law where it belongs.. In the dodgy short swarzosky's anus..
Freedom of expression.. I think it could have a basis in the ECHR on a matter of public interest.