Muslim school denies forcing girls to wear the veil
8 October 2010
One Comment
Lancaster school Jamea Al Kauthar is denying national newspaper claims that it forces pupils to wear the veil.
The £2,500-a-year all-girls Muslim boarding school was one of just three institutions to be named in a Sunday Telegraph report on compulsory veil policies in schools in the UK.
The article claimed Jamea Al Kauthar had introduced rules which forced girls to wear the burka or a full headscarf and veil known as the niqab when they were walking to or from school. It said the school’s uniform policy had been heavily criticised by mainstream Muslims who believed enforcement of the veil was a “dangerous precedent” and that children attending such schools were being “brainwashed”.
Jamea Al Kauthar declined to comment directly to the Lancaster Guardian but posted a statement on its website refuting the claims. The school said: “In response to the articles appearing in several newspapers regarding the enforcement of the veil upon our students, we would like to clarify that Jamea Al-Kauthar does not force any student to wear the veil. However, we do encourage students to dress modestly.”
Lancaster Guardian, 8 October 2010
Clearly we misreported this issue. Rather than identifying a mere three schools in the UK that require pupils to wear the niqab, the Sunday Telegraph found at most two.
islam is a religion of peace as derived from its arabic meaning, now can you tell me for example jews wearing black when they go to their school or just as their religious dress code, is it called forcing? Surely not its called freedom and adopting to your own religions Laws, i am extremly disheartened by what the media portrays of islam and this being a example. All the girls at jamea al kauthar do not feel that the are forced to wear the veil, infact they are more then happy to feel free that they can carry out their religious dress code, we should all have the freedom to practise religion to create unity withing the country and therfore no views going against it,
28 October 2012 at 10:54 am