Muslim woman told she cannot wear veil in court - Page 2 - Historum

**Rasta** · August 19th, 2010, 09:39 AM

Quote:

I agree, but the question is not to be socialist-fair with people in court. She is not uncomfortable about giving testimony - but about uncovering her face in public. Is THAT fair? To make her expose herself to more people than necessary?

I guess that depends if one believes that a trial by jury is necessary for a fair trial.

**diddyriddick** · August 19th, 2010, 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vera

I agree, but the question is not to be socialist-fair with people in court. She is not uncomfortable about giving testimony - but about uncovering her face in public. Is THAT fair? To make her expose herself to more people than necessary?

I understand the necessity, and totally agree to it in this case; don't think the solution in the end was considerate of the woman at all. I think they could be more creative, if they were more respectful. Why were they not? Because the burka draws strong negative feelings from non-wearers, probably.

Vera brings up a very good point. Again, while I am not a lawyer, I think (from watching crime shows) that witnesses can be "deposed" without an actual appearance in court. Perhaps some similar acceptable solution could be reached here.

**Salah** · August 19th, 2010, 09:41 AM

In a word (well, a few): I don't believe this was right.

d'artanian · August 19th, 2010, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vera

I understand the necessity, and totally agree to it in this case; don't think the solution in the end was considerate of the woman at all. I think they could be more creative, if they were more respectful. Why were they not? Because the burka draws strong negative feelings from non-wearers, probably.

The burka just does not work well in democratic societies for many/varied reasons.

**Rasta** · August 19th, 2010, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diddyriddick

Vera brings up a very good point. Again, while I am not a lawyer, I think (from watching crime shows) that witnesses can be "deposed" without an actual appearance in court. Perhaps some similar acceptable solution could be reached here.

Perhaps. Despositions are not done in Australia. Despositions usually serve the function of gaining oral evidence prior to a trial, or in the case of a witness who is dying, thus unable to appear in court. It does not necessarily preclude speaking in court.

**Ri Fhionngaill** · August 19th, 2010, 09:54 AM

Quote:

I agree, but the question is not to be socialist-fair with people in court. She is not uncomfortable about giving testimony - but about uncovering her face in public. Is THAT fair? To make her expose herself to more people than necessary?

It's not fair. But neither is changing the rights of one group over another. A court should be the same for every individual, with no inherent advantages or disadvantages that any change would bring. Some people might be more comfortable with it, others may not, but as soon as we start to change the legal system to suit some people over others there's an inherent bias. It's like divorce courts in the UK, where women are automatically assumed to be more responsible than men. Someone goes into the trial with an advantage. If one person is not compelled to give evidence in front of their peers, then they also have an advantage.

**vera** · August 19th, 2010, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rasta

I guess that depends if one believes that a trial by jury is necessary for a fair trial.

No, it depends on a will to give a good solution. It can still be a trial by jury, by this particular testimony may have been taken in such a way that general public was out, for instance. I am not called upon to decide, and do not know the particulars, but I am sure that any problem may be solved if there is a true will.

**vera** · August 19th, 2010, 09:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d'artanian

The burka just does not work well in democratic societies for many/varied reasons.

While it has little to do with democracy, that is absolutely true by association. However, this is not the point of the decision or the dilemma. It would be good to try to look at it without the emotions about the burka. Just from the point of view of an ethical dilemma and human beings, with deeply ingrained fears, cultural patterns etc. From the point of view of the love of people and respect for them.

**vera** · August 19th, 2010, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ri Fhionngaill

It's not fair. But neither is changing the rights of one group over another. A court should be the same for every individual, with no inherent advantages or disadvantages that any change would bring. Some people might be more comfortable with it, others may not, but as soon as we start to change the legal system to suit some people over others there's an inherent bias. It's like divorce courts in the UK, where women are automatically assumed to be more responsible than men. Someone goes into the trial with an advantage. If one person is not compelled to give evidence in front of their peers, then they also have an advantage.

You are once again arguing a nonexistent point.

Does this woman want to wear a burka in order to avoid the discomfort of courtroom? NO! She always wears it! The purpose of it is not exposing her face to the public, and not avoiding being uncomfortable while giving testimony.

**Ri Fhionngaill** · August 19th, 2010, 10:03 AM

Everyone else has to do it whether they want to expose their face to the public or not.