In early 2001, Sultaana Freeman, a convert to Islam, living in Florida, USA, routinely received her new driving licence in the post, just like thousands of her fellow American citizens do every week. There she was in the photo, with her full Islamic black veil, with only her eyes being visible. Then, a few months later, just after the 9/11 attacks, she was instructed to have her photo re-taken without the veil so that she could be identified. She refused and her license was accordingly revoked. Enraged by this infringement on her human rights, she enlisted the support of the American Civil Liberties Union

During this high profile case “Freeman vs Florida”, assistant Attorney General Jason Vail (almost the most apt surname!) had argued that Islamic law has exceptions that allow women to expose their faces if it serves a public good, and that arrangements could be made to have Freeman photographed with only women present to allay her concerns about modesty. Ms Freeman and her legal team totally disagreed and fought on, but lost the case. After hearing three days of testimony, Circuit Judge Janet C. Thorpe ruled that Sultaana Freeman's right to free exercise of religion would not be infringed by having to show her face on her license. Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist praised the Judge’s decision, saying "Nothing is more important than making sure that our people are safe."
On the home front, the Taoiseach Bertie Ahern led a trade mission to Saudi Arabia in January with a selection of business people and accompanied with the Minister for Education Mary Hanafin and the Minister for Agriculture Mary Coughlan. Well known as highly capable Ministers, one would have expected them to be at the forefront of the proceedings with their beloved leader, driving the case for Irish business in this lucrative market. However the reality was quite different. In an obvious pre-arranged strategy, these stalwarts of Irish politics were relegated to the sidelines and obediently covered their heads, saying very little, almost downtrodden, emulating the well known roles of Islamic women. One headline cheekily declared “Bertie’s Harem” and you could almost imagine the girls in full length veils. Seriously though, Saudi Arabia, often relaxed in its Muslim traditions, is guilty of serious human rights abuse over the years but insists that women must cover their heads in public.

Sexism is rife and it was only recently that women were allowed to drive and stoning women in public is only now being frowned upon, but if you do it private, that’s OK, as is men having several wives. No problem whatsoever – as long as you are a man, you’re grand. In January, Ministers Hanafin and Coughlan were just the latest victims of this oppressive religious nonsense. In this World of contrasts, yes we should abide by the culture and laws of other Countries and their people, but equally, we must draw clear lines as to how far we go. No sensible person would agree, for example, that a female Muslim Garda should be allowed on duty wearing a veil, simply because it would be impossible to carry out her duties, apart from confusing criminals somewhat. However, is that next legal challenge that could occur, backed by the ever vigilant human rights campaigners? We all remember the case of the school teacher in the UK granted full legal aid to sue the local authority for not allowing her to wear her veil in class. She had obtained the job without the veil and then promptly put it back on in the classroom thereby confusing the children as they couldn’t understand what she was saying half the time and could not relate to her at all.

The current dilemma facing the Irish Government on this front is the refusal of An Garda Síochána to allow a Sikh reservist to wear his turban whilst on duty. Is this man being unreasonable in his request or are his employers unreasonable in their stance, backed by recent Government statements on the issue? Minister Conor Lenihan, most famous for calling low paid Turkish workers as “kebabs” is the new Minister for Integration and has squarely backed the decision of Garda commissioner, Noel Conroy. The Minister quoted recently: "If we are to take integration seriously, people who come here must understand our way of doing things. When the president and ministers travel to the Middle East, they accept cultural requirements of the country and the culture they are operating in. It is a vice versa situation with regard to Ireland". Whilst that statement does make sense, it is not as simple as that. Clearly, common sense must prevail and we must make the distinction about what is patently right or wrong. I believe it is wrong to comply with rules that go against this simple edict. There is no comparison between a Sikh wearing his turban and a Muslim woman wearing her veil. The decision on the issue should be made on the suitability of the practice, religious or not, relative to the job and the effectiveness of that person in that job. Full stop.

A good friend of mine, a practicing Sikh who has been living here for many years, has contributed immensely to both employment and integration in Co. Clare. He and his family can be seen as a shining example of how well people can add so much value, despite coming from a totally different culture and background. From a zero start, he built up a successful business employing over 130 staff and despite many setbacks, including being stopped and searched after 9/11 due to his turban, he has shown how it is indeed possible not just to integrate successfully, but to show local people the diversity and values of Indian culture, from the food and dress to the attitude of tolerance and self-belief. The Sikh turban is a not just a symbol, it is part of the make-up of the person and the strong belief of not cutting the hair. Around the World, there are Sikhs with turbans and long hair and Sikhs who choose not to adhere to those edicts, but all views should be respected and as I said earlier, practical considerations should be made and not just knee jerk reactions. It is widely acknowledged that Sikhs are civic-spirited and decent people who have shown great courage in both World Wars and whose instinct is to contribute in a positive way to society at large. This is undoubtedly true. It is also widely acknowledged that religious practice needs to be respected. This is less true, though Sikhism seems to be at the fairly harmless end of the scale.

Look at Rastafarianism, a religion that believes Haile Selassie - a dead, mass-murdering despot - is God. Governments should always be careful about changing their laws to accommodate religious demands, but that isn't what is being requested in the case of the Sikh reservist. There is no law against the wearing of turbans and equally no Garda regulations specifically forbidding it. As Superintendent John Grogan stated recently: "To effectively achieve integration of many cultures into a single organisation will require a very fluid approach. Policies and practices will be altered and adjusted where appropriate". I do hope they will follow their own advice and allow their eager recruit to wear his turban on duty. If they do, they will join the USA, Canada and the UK for allowing common sense to prevail. However, it does look as if our Government has already decided to implement the stance of places like Saudi Arabia in its new policies of a new multi-cultured Ireland.

Jas Kalsi, BSc(Eng)Hons, MBA is a Management Consultant and former President of the Ennis Chamber of Commerce. E-Mail: jas1962@gmail.com