Frances Gibb Legal Editor Published at 12:01AM, September 13 2013 A Muslim woman has been allowed to appear in court and enter a plea without removing her full-face veil. In the first case of its kind, the woman, who denied a charge of witness intimidation, had been told previously by the judge that she would have to show her face to plead, so that she could be conclusively identified. The woman, who is from London and cannot be identified for legal reasons, had insisted that she was unable to remove the veil in the presence of men for religious reasons. Yesterday, Judge Peter Murphy changed his mind and allowed her to plead not guilty while wearing a niqab. His decision came after after a female custody sergeant who had seen the woman’s face when she was photographed after her arrest had a private viewing with her in a room at Blackfriars Crown Court in London. The officer then swore on oath that it was the same woman. Judge Murphy said: “I would be satisfied for the officer giving evidence, having seen the defendant backstage, so to speak, in a private setting, saying she could identify her.” The judge will give a ruling on Monday as to whether the woman can stand trial while wearing the veil, which only shows her eyes. The case is believed to be the first involving the issue of a defendant wearing a veil as opposed to a witness. Susan Meek, for the defence, told the court that “ultimately it’s the choice of the defendant if she wishes to wear it”. She argued that her client had a right to wear the veil yesterday and also at her trial in November under Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which safeguards religious beliefs. The judge questioned whether that amounted to “dictating” to the court how it should conduct its proceedings. Ms Meek said that it was not a question of being “dictated” to; the court’s role was to “balance” the rights of members of society and highlighted the “tolerant” approach taken to Islamic dress in the UK. “She is entitled to wear it in private and in public,” Ms Meek said. “That right to wear the niqab also extends to the courtroom.” She said that the defendant’s only active participation would be if she chose to give evidence, suggesting that the jury would be able to make a judgment based on her answers and body language despite the veil. “To ask her to remove it, if that is the court’s opinion, what consequences follow? A court order and proceedings of contempt? Is that right and fair?” Kate Wilkinson, for the prosecution, said that the Crown did not oppose the defendant wearing a veil. Judge Murphy said he would hand down a written direction regarding the trial at the same court on Monday.
Posted on: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 07:18:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015