Dear sisters and brothers,

Assalaamu 'alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh

All praise be to Allah for allowing me to be here with you, in the first visit to this glorious country which is dear to my heart and that of all Muslims. It is a pleasure to address you today, bringing to you the solidarity of your sisters both in Europe and in Tunisia.

Let me begin by addressing the plight of the hijab in Tunisia, for it is strikingly similar to that in Turkey. The names of 'Turkey and Tunisia' frequently appear adjacently and are referred to by both sides of the debate on this issue, making the two cases worthy of the focus and attention of anyone concerned about the ban anywhere in the world. We thus find those who justify the ban often referring to the two countries when they fail to find convincing arguments for the ban in European countries, as we have heard from many politicians and writers.

The ban in these two countries of glorious Muslim heritage was not a measure imposed by foreign powers or by non-Muslim governments against a Muslim minority. Although Tunisia lived under French colonisation for three quarters of a century from 1881 to 1956, its Arab-Islamic identity remained generally intact, thanks to its well-established 13-century-old roots and the vigilant efforts of its glorious Zaytounah Mosque and education system. However, the post-independence government of Tunisia soon deprived the country of this glorious institution, bringing it under state control and limiting its influence by depriving it of its independence. Prior to post-independence rule, almost 80 per cent of educational institutions in Tunisia belonged to the private sector and were financed by allocated endowment funds (waqf), as did one third of agricultural properties. All were confiscated by the state. Mosques were brought under state control, and al-Zaytounah eventually became a mere department for Islamic studies and a tourist attraction. Zaytounah graduates found themselves marginalised, while those educated in French institutions, like Habib Bourguiba took the reigns of power, to execute their project of pseudo-modernisation, which to them was synonymous with 'westernisation' and 'secularisation'.

The hijab was one of the victims of this assault on the Tunisian people's identity and heritage, in which everything that was not 'western' was seen as a symbol of backwardness that must be eradicated. In his quest to "catch up with so- called advanced nations" (which Bourguiba understood to refer to France), he showed extreme disdain and contempt for the sacred beliefs of the people. Thus he urged people not to observe the fast of Ramadan, he ridiculed sayings of the Prophet pbuh and verses of the Quran, and urged women to seek a disfigured brand of emancipation, personally removing the headscarf of a woman during a rally as an example.

Through absolute control of the education system, the media, the mosques and restricting all freedoms, Bourguiba assumed that it was possible to change the nature and identity of a people and model it according to his own distorted vision. In 1981, in an unprecedented deplorable law, known as law number 108, the headscarf, which was called 'sectarian dress' was banned in Tunisian schools, universities and workplaces. Thousands of working women including doctors and civil servants have been sacked from their jobs because they insisted on dressing in a manner that did not agree with the taste of the President or with the style which he understood to represent modernity. Girls and young women who wore the hijab, like my sister, had to remove their headscarves before entering their schools or colleges, otherwise they would face 'disciplinary action' and be expelled. This continued to be the case until the end of Bourguiba's rule that came in a coup d'etat in November 1987.

The new President promised he would restore liberties and democracy. Tunisia witnessed a few years of relative openness, and law 108 was no longer enforced. However, openness gave more opportunities for the opposition whose influence was stronger than could be tolerated by the new President. A new wave of repression began in 1990. The hijab ban was again enforced in schools and workplaces. Girls who wore the hijab to school had to remove it, and sign a statement, which had also to be signed by their parents, pledging never to wear it again. Political police agents have been deployed in all educational institutions in order to force girls as well as teachers to remove their scarves in public, leading to severe psychological effects. Thousands of students have since been compelled to leave school and many women have lost their jobs. Moreover, the enforcement was not restricted to workplaces and educational institutions. Women who wore the hijab were arrested in the streets and taken to police stations where they were harassed and forced to sign a similar pledge never to wear it again. Some had their headscarves ripped off their heads in the street. Relatives of women who wore the hijab lost their jobs, unless the female relatives stopped wearing the hijab. Women were also refused hospital treatment unless they removed their hijab. Even women who were in labour were denied the right to admission into hospitals for wearing the so-called "sectarian dress". Prisoners' mothers, wives or relatives could not visit their relatives in prison while wearing the hijab. Identity cards and passports were also not issued to women with hijab. Even according to the US Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, "The Government revoked the identity cards of an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 Islamists and fundamentalists, which seriously disadvantaged them... According to reliable sources, the Government has refused to issue passports to Islamists and fundamentalists", which of course means those committed to religious practice. While this was taking place, Tunisia still enjoyed a reputation as a country that has a moderate climate and a moderate regime, which is modern and advanced compared to its neighbours in the Arab, Islamic and in third worlds. Ben Ali's policies were praised by French president Chirac, and as reported in Human Rights Watch's 1999 Report "Unwarranted praise was conferred by First Lady Hillary Clinton during her goodwill visit to the region. In a March 26 speech in Tunis she hailed Tunisia as a "model for the entire world" with respect to the progress made "on behalf of women and women's rights." But women, like men, were thwarted or punished whenever they exercised their rights to speak, associate, and assemble in a manner that displeased the authorities."

While the plight of women wearing hijab was mostly ignored by most international human rights organisations due to government propaganda claiming that hijab was a fundamentalist political symbol, in the late 1990's, as a result of the obvious and fast spreading extent of the state's repression beyond just Islamists but to all critics, human rights reports started refering to the harassment of women who wear hijab in the long list of human rights violations committed by the Tunisian authorities. In a report on Tunisia in 1997, Amnesty International wrote:

"Wearing the hijab (Islamic headscarf), or even an ordinary headscarf is seen by the authorities as evidence that the women belong to or support political Islamist groups. As a result of harassment and intimidation by the security forces, especially since 1992-93, women stopped wearing the hijab (...) However, in recent years increasing pressure has been put on women to stop wearing the headscarf. Women working in the public sector were threatened with dismissal if they did not stop wearing the headscarf, even though they only wore it outside the workplace, and some were dismissed. Women who were summoned for interrogation or who were arrested in the streets and taken to the Ministry of the Interior or to police stations had their headscarves removed by force.

Cases of such gross violations of human rights against women are widespread and have been repeatedly brought to the attention of the Tunisian authorities by Amnesty International and other human rights organizations. The fact that such practices continue clearly show that the Tunisian authorities, who often stress their support for women’s rights, do not hesitate to violate these same rights with impunity."

The law continued to be applied, sometimes with great enthusiasm and vigour, and at other times lapsing to formal enforcement in schools and workplaces, according to internal and external conditions. In the last few years, despite the banning of Islamists and the continuous government control of the media, education and all associations and institutions, Tunisia has been witnessing a new religious revival, which many attribute to the increased religiosity and awareness of Tunisians, due to, among other factors, the availability of alternative information through satellite channels and the Internet. The spontaneous wearing of hijab by young Tunisian women had no relation to any political movement, as all opposition movements have been banned and driven abroad.

Nevertheless, the state has re-vitalised the ban on hijab. Female university students were referred to the university’s disciplinary council for refusing to take off their Hijabs inside the campus, dozens of students were not allowed to sit their exams unless they remove their hijab. Previously silent on this issue, the Tunisian League for Human Rights, released an unprecedented statement, calling on the Tunisian authorities to put an end to their anti-Hijab campaign. On the other hand, the Tunisian Association of Democratic Women, a small radically feminist organisation, expressed horror at the widespread phenomenon of hijab among Tunisian women, which it regards as an oppressive backward symbol, and shockingly attributed it, not to women's own personal choice, but to "the government tolerance"! Thus we see an organisation expected to defend personal freedoms and human rights calling for state intervention and repression.

However, women in Tunisia, no longer isolated from the rest of the world, are resisting state intervention in their private affairs, and are seeking to make their forgotten case heard abroad. Last February, in a move seen as the first of its kind, a Tunisian female lawyer and human rights activist filed a lawsuit to revoke Law no. 108. Saida Akremi argued that "the law brazenly violates the basics rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states that everyone has the right to freedom of religion and to choose the clothes which suit him/her, and that the law also contradicts the Tunisian Constitution which asserts that Islam is the religion of Tunisia".

 Turning to the opposite side of the Mediterranean, the situation in France is a little more perplexing. While many find Tunisia's ban on hijab hard to believe in view of Tunisia's Muslim character, France's ban contradicts its image as a champion of "liberte, egalite, fraternite" (Freedom, Equality, Fraternity). While in Tunisia the persecution of women who wear the hijab is part of a bigger picture of violations of human rights, France has been seen as a democratic country guaranteeing freedom and protecting its citizens' rights.

 France’s unjust decision to ban the hijab was justified on the basis that the hijab - this simple piece of fabric- threatens the very existence of the French Republic and its ideals of secularity and tolerance. But instead of not interfering in personal affairs, the state is interfering in the crudest way, to the point of dictating to people how they must dress. Instead of guaranteeing every individual’s right to choose, young women are punished for exercising their freedom of choice. And instead of being neutral and not deciding the significance of one religious symbol or another, French MPs and politicians are falling over themselves to assert that the hijab is a devious political symbol and an insult to women’s dignity.

Another popular argument to justify the ban is that the French state is combating fundamentalism. We’re told that young 13 or 14 year-old girls wearing scarves are dangerous fundamentalists intent on destroying the French state. However, anyone with a shred of sanity can see that the French government are the fundamentalists. Because what we are seeing in France today is nothing short of fundamentalism - an ugly secular fundamentalism that refuses to acknowledge the most basic human freedoms.

Another popular cry is that this ban is for the benefit of poor, oppressed Muslim women. Thus in a patronising way, the assumption is that Muslim women are incapable of using their minds to make their own choices, and however loud the majority of women cry that they have freely chosen to wear the hijab, the French government insists: You are oppressed, you just don’t know it!

In Germany Chancellor Schroeder has said that "headscarves have no place among people who act on behalf of the state, and that includes teachers". Out of Germany's sixteen states one had already passed a law banning Muslim women teachers from its schools, and at least five states are in the process of passing similar bans.

In Belgium the Deputy Prime Minister Patrick Daweael has called for a hijab ban on all civil servants including teachers and doctors, and on school pupils. A draft law has been presented to the Senate. Not waiting for the law to pass, some schools have already begun implementing the ban, as have some hospitals and medical schools.

In Denmark, Italy, Spain and other European countries, there have cases of women dismissed from school and work because they wore hijab, and statements made by ministers supporting a hijab-ban.

It is with these dangerous events in mind that the Assembly for the protection of Hijab was initiated following the alarming spread of Hijab ban across and around the world. We are concerned that such discriminatory legislation will alienate Muslim women and their communities, and thus have a deep negative impact on community relations, effectively encouraging racism and hostility towards Muslims, thus stoking the flames of intolerance and hatred. There are already clear records reflecting the increase in hatred, Islamophobia and Xenophobia against Europe’s 15-25 Million Muslims.

While the ban claims to liberate Muslim women, the campaigns to protect the right to wear hijab have been led by these same women. Thousands of young women marched in the streets of France wearing Hijab in the colours of the French flag and holding their French identity cards - confirming their French identity but reserving the right to choose their dress. Thousands of Muslim women took part in rallies in around 35 countries around the world on 17th Jan 2004 outside French Embassies and Consulates, making clear their total rejection of the ban. On 4th September again, 21 countries around the world joined in a day of solidarity, showing their determination and pride in their way of life.

The situation is Britain remains a positive case in its European environment. The British government has pledged its support to the Assembly for the Protection of Hijab when it was launched in the House of Commons on 14 June 2004, which confirmed that the British Government takes pride in pluralism and diversity and respects individual religious freedoms. The Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has stood firmly in support of religious freedom and extended his hospitality at City Hall on 12th July by hosting the Assembly’s first conference. The conference, titled “Hijab - a Woman’s Right to Choose” was a gathering of over 350 people, representing over 202 organisations from 15 countries around the world.

The Assembly to Protect the Hijab has also brought this cause to the European Parliament The Assembly, in conjunction with Caroline Lucas MEP, presented a seminar in the European Parliament on 22nd September to lobby MEPs to sign a written declaration regarding the ban, to be presented before the European Parliament early next year. We encourage assistance from all supporters of human rights to help exert pressure on MEPs in all countries to sign this declaration.

We Muslim women in Europe are confident that our cause is a just cause, and that our  right to choose what we wear is guaranteed by our national European laws, as well as by international conventions.  Above all, we are convinced that this dress we have freely chosen is to us a powerful medium of liberation. Far from being a symbol of oppression and subjugation, this hijab represents our own vehicle to free choice and emancipation. Individuals’ life preferences, including modes of dress, are a strictly individual affair that lies outside the scope of state control and interference. It is none of the state’s business to decide the food we eat, the music we listen to, the thoughts we entertain, or indeed the dress we wear. This, after all, is the most basic meaning of individual liberty. And however it seeks to justify itself, denying Muslim women their basic right to choose their dress is nothing short of islamophobic, undemocratic and truly tyrannical.

Thank You.