Terrorists Attack French Satirical Magazine

In a still developing story from France, at least 12 people were killed and 4 others critically wounded today in a terrorist attack by two heavily armed gunmen at the Paris offices of the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo.  The magazine has been a target in the past because of its publishing of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad or satirizing Islamic law.  The magazine has also satirized other religious groups. CNN reports on today's attack in a post that is being updated on a continuous basis.

French Court Says Local Council's Nativity Scene Violates Principle of Secularism

On Tuesday in France, the Nantes administrative court ruled that the traditional nativity scene that for years has been placed at the entrance to the Vendee government's council building in La Roche-sur-Yon must be removed. As reported by The Local, the court held that the display is inconsistent with the principle of secularism (laicitie) embodied in France's 1905 Law on Separation of Churches and State. The ruling came in a case filed by the local Free Thinking Association, and shortly after a Belgian activist group tore down a nativity scene in Brussels.

Paris Opera House Bans Wearing of Niqab

France's 2010 ban on wearing of the full-face veil (niqab) in public places gained new attention this month when on Oct. 3 a tourist from the Gulf States and her male companion who had purchased the most expensive seats for the opera La Traviata at Opera Bastille were ejected before the second act. They were seated directly behind the conductor.  According to an RT report this week, some of the performers said they would not continue before a faceless audience member. They claimed the woman's clothing was distracting. The couple left without trying to obtain a refund of the almost $600 they had paid for their tickets.  A day later, the Opera issued new rules in an internal memo. As subsequently reported by RT, anyone whose face is covered with a veil, mask or hood, so that only their eyes are visible, will be ejected. A hijab that only covers the hair is permitted.

Muslims In Europe Concerned About Names Used To Refer To ISIS/ ISIL

The New York Times reported last week that Muslims in France and Britain have been urging their governments to find a name other than "Islamic State" to refer to ISIL. French Muslims say that using "Islamic State" stigmatizes the country's Muslims and gives unwarranted legitimacy to ISIL. French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius announced last month that his government would refer to the terrorist group as "Daesh", an acronym for the group's Arabic name "Al-Dawla al-Islamiya fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham." Some experts warn, however, that Daesh creates negative reactions because it sounds like the Arabic word "daes" that means to trample or crush. American Muslim groups generally agree that any name that does not actually use the workd "Islamic" is acceptable, so that they generally do not object to "ISIS".

French Court Suspends Municipal By-Law Banning Religious Symbols At Beach

In France, last Saturday a Versailles Administrative Court suspended, pending a final ruling on the merits, a by-law adopted by the town of Wissous that banned wearing of religious symbols on the town's beach. AFP reports that the prior week, Wissous Mayor Richard Trinquier, invoking the by-law, had turned away two mothers wearing hijabs (Muslim headscarves) who had brought their children to the beach. This led to an emergency court action being brought by the French government and an organization that combats Islamophobia, in which they argued that the by-law infringes the fundamental freedom of religious belief.  The mayor had claimed that the by-law protects France's commitment to secularism.

European Court Upholds France's Ban Wearing Burqa In Public

The European Court of Human Rights today, in a Grand Chamber judgment, upheld France's ban on Muslim women wearing the full-face veil in public.  In S.A.S. v. France, (ECHR, July 1, 2014), the court by a vote of 15-2 held that France's law prohibiting the concealment of one’s face in public places (and thus barring the burqa and niqab) does not violate either Art. 8 (respect for private and family life) or Art. 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court unanimously held that the law does not violate Art. 14 (discrimination). The Court concluded that the ban can be justified as a means of guaranteeing the conditions of "living together." The Court said in part:

[W]hile it is true that the scope of the ban is broad, because all places accessible to the public are concerned (except for places of worship), the Law of 11 October 2010 does not affect the freedom to wear in public any garment or item of clothing – with or without a religious connotation – which does not have the effect of concealing the face. The Court is aware of the fact that the impugned ban mainly affects Muslim women who wish to wear the full-face veil. It nevertheless finds it to be of some significance that the ban is not expressly based on the religious connotation of the clothing in question but solely on the fact that it conceals the face.....

... [T]he respondent State is seeking to protect a principle of interaction between individuals, which in its view is essential for the expression not only of pluralism, but also of tolerance and broadmindedness without which there is no democratic society .... In such circumstances, the Court has a duty to exercise a degree of restraint in its review of Convention compliance, since such review will lead it to assess a balance that has been struck by means of a democratic process within the society in question.

The Court also issued a press release summarizing the decision. CNN reports on the decision. [Thanks to Paul de Mello for the lead.]

High-Ranking French Rabbi's Religious Court Accused of Extorting Funds To Get Divorce Document For Wife

The Forward yesterday reported on allegations made two months ago in France against the Chief Rabbi of Paris (who is now also serving as the interim Chief Rabbi of France) by a woman who claims that the rabbi-- Michel Gugenheim-- was involved in extorting 90,000 Euros (approximately $123,000 US) from her in exchange for her obtaining a get (Jewish divorce document). According to a deposition filed in March with Paris police by the woman's family, the 28-year old woman's husband demanded 30,000 Euros from her before he would give her a get.  Apparently Gugenheim and two other rabbis serving on his rabbinical court backed the husband's demand, and asked the woman's family to pay it by writing a check for 90,000 Euros as a charitable contribution to the Sinai religious institution.  French tax authorities would reimburse the family for 60,000 Euros of that since it was a charitable contribution. The charity would then transfer 30,000 Euros to the husband and keep the rest. Asked to comment, Gugenheim denied any wrongdoing.

11 French Towns Will Ban Schools From Serving Alternatives When Pork Is On The Menu

In local elections in France last week, the right-wing Front National party, led by  Marine Le Pen, won control of eleven local town councils.  According to RFI  and The Local, Le Pen told RTL Radio yesterday that those eleven towns will now ban their school cafeterias from providing Muslim and Jewish students menu alternatives when the school serves pork meals. She said: "We will not accept any religious requirements on school menus.  There is no reason for religion to enter into the public sphere, that's the law."

French Court Fines Muslim Woman For Wearing Niqab In Public

In France yesterday, a court in Versailles dismissed a constitutional challenge to France's 2010 law prohibiting women from wearing the niqab or burqa in public.  According to Voice of America,  the court fined Muslim convert Cassandra Belin 150 euros and imposed a 1-month suspended sentence for wearing the niqab in public and for insulting police who ticketed her for doing so. In a different case, a challenge to France's anti-niqab law is pending before the European Court of Human Rights.

EU Directive Requires Companies To Give Same Benefits to Civil Partners Where Same-Sex Marriage Is Unavailable

In Hay v. Crédit agricole mutuel de Charente-Maritime et des Deux-Sèvres, (Eur. Ct. Jus. 5th Chamber, Dec. 12, 2013), the 5th Chamber of the European Court of Justice held that under Council Directive 2000/78/EC that creates a framework for equal treatment in employment, it amounts to direct discrimination for a French firm to deny a same-sex couple entering a civil partnership the same benefits given couples being married. The court concluded that:

an employee who concludes a PACS [civil solidarity pact] with a person of the same sex [must be] allowed to obtain the same benefits, such as days of special leave and a salary bonus, as those granted to employees on the occasion of their marriage, where the national rules of the Member State concerned do not allow persons of the same sex to marry, in so far as, in the light of the objective of and the conditions relating to the grant of those benefits, that employee is in a comparable situation to an employee who marries.

Art Leonard Observations has analysis of the decision. [Thanks to Alliance Alert for the lead.]

European Court Hears Arguments In French Burqa Ban Challenge

Yesterday, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights heard oral arguments (video of full arguments) in S.A.S. v. France, (Application no. 43835/11).  As described in a press release from the Court:

The case concerns the complaint of a French national, who is a practising Muslim, that she is no longer allowed to wear the full-face veil in public following the entry into force, in April 2011, of a law prohibiting concealment of one’s face in public places.

(See prior related posting.)