Information note on decision 2662/2015 of the Committee

French

UN rights experts: Sacking woman for wearing "Islamic veil" violated her freedom of religion

France violated the human rights of an educational childcare center employee, who was fired in 2008 for violating the center’s policy against wearing of the ‘Islamic veil’, the UN Human Rights Committee found in a decision issued on 10 August. In a decision focusing on the absence of a legitimate aim and lack of proportionality of the action taken against her, the Committee found that she was the victim of violation of her freedom to manifest her religion, as well as a victim of intersectional discrimination on the basis of her gender and religion.

The full decision in French is available here.

An English version of the decision should be published before the end of the year.

The former employee had worked in the childcare center since 1991. After returning from parental unpaid leave, she was terminated in 2008 on the basis of internal regulations which required employees to adhere to neutrality in matters of religion. After extensive litigation in France, which continued until 2014, the center’s decision to fire her without severance payment was approved by the French judiciary.

She then submitted an individual complaint to the Human Rights Committee under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Human Rights Committee oversees implementation by States parties of the ICCPR.

The Committee considered that to meet the requirements of article 18 of the ICCPR, France had to show that the ban on wearing the Islamic veil was necessary and proportionate. The Committee held that France did not adequately explain why it was necessary to insist that the former employee could not cover her hair as a condition for her continued employment in her place of work, nor demonstrate the proportionality of her being fired without severance pay in response to her decision to continue to wear the veil. It also opined that the childcare center’s policy which opposes to the education of young children by veil wearing women might lead “stigmatization of a religious community”.

The Committee did not review in general the principle of secularism (laïcité) and did not pass any judgment on it. “Our views pertained to a specific decision to terminate a person without severance pay - a decision on which French courts themselves were divided,” said Yuval Shany, Chair of the Committee.  

Since France did not provide persuasive explanations as to what specific harm would be averted by preventing the children or parents from being exposed to a veiled staff member, or why her dismissal would be a proportionate response, the Committee found that her treatment was not based on reasonable and objective criteria. As a result, the ban and its enforcement also constituted a form of intersectional discrimination, directed against the employer as a woman and a Muslim.

“It is the longstanding position of the Committee that the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief includes a freedom to choose a form of clothing giving expression, in the eyes of the individual, to his or her religion or belief,” Shany said, adding that States must justify measures taken against individuals exercising such a freedom.   

The Committee called on France to provide the former childcare worker with adequate compensation for the harm suffered, including her loss of employment, to reimburse her legal costs and take all steps necessary to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future. France had a duty to comply in good faith with its obligations under the ICCPR and the Optional Protocol, to which it is a State party, the Committee said, underscoring that it expected France to implement the Committee’s decision.   

ENDS

Background

The Human Rights Committee monitors States parties’ adherence to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which to date has been ratified by 171 States parties. The Committee is made up of 18 members who are independent human rights experts drawn from around the world, who serve in their personal capacity and not as representatives of States parties. The Committee’s concluding observations are an independent assessment of States’ compliance with their human rights obligations under the treaty.

The first Optional Protocol to the Covenant, ratified to date by 116 States parties, establishes the right of individuals to complain to the Committee against States for alleged violations of individuals’ human rights. For more information about the human rights Treaty Bodies’ Individual Communications procedures, please click here.