Legal News

Should Witnesses be Allowed to Wear Niqabs While Testifying?

By Ashby Jones

In our opinion, the best legal controversies arise when two compelling principles smack headlong into each other.

Here’s one: should a devout Muslim woman be required to lift her veil when testifying in court? The issue pits two cherished American values: the desire to let people practice their religions freely against the desire for transparency and integrity within our justice system.

The issue has been kicking around courts in Michigan for some time, as it turns out. And the Michigan Supreme Court made a bit of news on the topic on Wednesday when it voted to give judges authority over how witnesses dress in court. The new statewide rule, which gives judges the authority to regulate the appearance of witnesses - such as asking them to remove face coverings, was approved by a 5-2 vote. The dissenters said there should be an exception for people whose clothing is dictated by their religion. Click here for the AP story; here for the Detroit News story; here for the AP story.

According to the AP story, the issue arose recently in Michigan, which has a large Muslim population, when a Muslim woman went to small-claims court to contest a $3,000 charge from a rental-car company to repair a vehicle that she said thieves had broken into. Hamtramck District Judge Paul Paruk told Ginnah Muhammad (pictured) he needed to see her face to judge her truthfulness. Muhammad refused, insisting on keeping her niqab on during the 2006 hearing. Judge Paruk dismissed the case, claiming he needed to see her face to determine her truthfulness.

Muhammad sued the judge in federal court, and lost. The case is currently on appeal to the Sixth Circuit.

But after Muhammad sued the judge, the Michigan Judges Association and Michigan District Judges Association lent their support to a court rule giving judges “reasonable” control over the appearance of parties. The two justices who voted against the rule Wednesday said they favored a religious exception endorsed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan and religious groups.

LB readers, whaddya think?

Full post as published by Law Blog - WSJ.com on June 17, 2009 (boomark / email).