Hijab Or Forced Hijab?

NewsBharati    30-Jan-2025 15:31:21 PM
Total Views | 186
The World Hijab Day is observed on February 1st since the year 2013 which intends to portray hijab as a symbol of ‘identity’ and encourages people to wear hijab for a day and stand in solidarity with Muslim women across the globe. Ms. Nazma Khan, a social activist is the founder of world Hijab Day, who came up with the idea as a means to foster personal freedom of religious expression and cultural understanding by inviting women from all walks of life to experience the hijab for one day.


hijab child forced hijab

The theme for the 13th World Hijab Day 2025 was #HijabisUnsilenced which denotes the discrimination faced by Muslim women due to their ‘choice’ of wearing a Hijab. In this background, it is quintessential to understand the meaning of the words, ‘identity’ and ‘choice’ in contemporary Indian society. If one wishes to understand the true meaning of these words, it is equally significant to refer to Quranic verses which mention the word, Hijab. Samina Ali, a novelist, curator and award-winning author while delivering a TED talk on Hijab, mentioned that the Prophet was assigned a task to protect the women of the city from any attacks and molestations from outsiders during night hours, especially when the women used to step out to relieve themselves. In another context, there was a piece of costume which was worn by some women known as a jilbab which was also a status symbol. Therefore, it was believed that the women while wearing the said piece of costume, were considered free and protected from possible attacks from outsiders. On the contrary, the women who were not wearing jilbab were tagged as slaves and were molested frequently.

In view of the same, a direction was issued which stated that all women must dress similarly, especially by wearing a piece of costume similar to jilbab, so that they shall not be facing any kind of molestation. Hence, during the given period the women’s identity was required to be covered with the said piece of costume considering the extreme requirements of that time. Further, in the Quran, there are three verses which mention a woman’s dress but it does not directly refer to the requirement of a Hijab as a veil. However, various scholars have interpreted the verses to mean that the Hijab is a mandate in the Quran; however, the Hijab fundamentally means a physical separation, a divide and is used in the context when other men were interacting with the Prophet’s wife.

A choice of clothing is a right of an individual but it needs to be exercised with free consent and not under any coercion. Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India states that every citizen of India has a ‘freedom to speech and expression’ subject to the reasonable restrictions which are enshrined within the Article itself. This right gives freedom to the citizens in every aspect of their lives including the choice of wearing any clothes provided it does not affect the decency or morality of the society. However, there are girl children of tender age who are seen wearing a hijab and therefore, the question which arises in such satiation is whether these girls are exercising their autonomy to wear a hijab or are they being pressured to do the same. Imagine a girl of three years wearing a hijab, in this scenario, can it be assumed that she is exercising her right to choice? The simple answer is no!!! because this girl cannot decide at this age about her sense and choice of clothing. So, even an opportunity is not given to such girls as since their childhood itself, they are put under the fear that if they do not wear a hijab, they will be shunned down by their parents, family and largely, society. The instillation of fear in such young minds leads to a coerced choice in future.

It is imperative to mention that wearing a hijab should not be equated with the modesty of a woman because if that is considered to be true, that itself amounts to be a gross violation of gender justice principles. Gender justice intends to ensure that no discrimination takes place only because of someone’s gender. This illusion of cultural chastity which is imposed has to be critically scrutinized especially by women. A woman should not be considered as a commodity which can be objectified. For instance, there is a doctrine in marriage laws known as ‘Doctrine of Coverture’ which signifies that a woman joins the identity of her husband after marriage and she does not exercise a separate identity. Such women are considered as objects who should not have a different voice than her husband. Applying the said example in the present context of hijab, this also considers women as objects wherein, if they do not follow the commandments, that may lead to a sin.

A veil is a kind of clothing which may encompass within its ambit not only a hijab but also various other kinds which intends to cover not only the head but also the face of women such as a burqa, abaya, niqab, khimar etc. Hence, a veil is a general term which may also be used for reasons such as protection from extreme weather conditions; however, a hijab is used for covering the head and chest of a women which has been used in socio-religious and political context. Again, the question is whether this hijab is ensuring self-expression, individuality and freedom of a woman. An individual autonomy is a priced asset for every human being which is also protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India which deals with Right to Life and Personal Liberty. There have been several judicial decisions by the Supreme Court of India in which the courts have reiterated the principles of individual autonomy and free-decision making choices. In Shafin Jahan v. Ashokan K.M., the court stated that “Our choices are respected because they are ours. Social approval for intimate personal decisions is not the basis for recognising them. Indeed, the Constitution protects personal liberty from disapproving audiences.” Hence, it needs to be understood that social approval is not required in cases of personal decisions as it cannot be the deciding factor for a practice to be right or wrong.

One of the debates surrounding wearing a hijab is whether it constitutes an essential religious practice within the purview of Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The said Article guarantees the “freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion”. However, this right isn’t absolute and is subject to public order, morality, health, and other fundamental rights. In one of the instances regarding the controversy of hijab in 2018, a local college in Udupi district of Karnataka denied entry to college girls wearing a hijab. The decision by the college was challenged in the High Court of Karnataka, wherein the court upheld the decision of the college. Subsequent to this decision by the High Court, in Aishat Shifa v. State of Karnataka, the Supreme Court of India examined the constitutionality of a government order which prohibited female Muslim students from wearing a headscarf or hijab inside schools and colleges. The apex court of India delivered a split verdict, wherein one the Hon’ble judges upheld the order by opining that secularism as mentioned in the preamble of the Constitution of India is meant for all. If one religious community is permitted to wear their religious symbol, it would be anti-thesis to secularism. Further, it was stated that uniform among the students fosters a sense of equality, and is an equalizer of inequalities. This judgment has also enunciated the concept of the true meaning of an essential religious practice by stating that an essential part of a religion means upon which the core beliefs upon which a religion is founded. It is upon the cornerstone of that essential practices that the religion is built without which a religion will be no religion. Hence, in light of the discussion regrading hijab, it cannot be said that it is an essential religious practice without which Islam as a religion cannot function. However, the matter is yet to be decided by a larger bench of the Supreme Court.

In light of the discussion on hijab, it is equally important to understand and analyse the global perspective on this practice to be followed by Muslim women. There are various Muslim majority countries across the globe who have their own set of legal mechanism and rules for moral policing of women and their clothing. Unfortunately, one such instance which was reported in the year 2022 was the death of Ms. Mhasa Amini, a 22-year-old girl from Iran who was allegedly killed for violating the rules regarding wearing a head scarf. In 2023, Iran passed a law that relates to fatal punishments for not wearing a hijab which may range from imprisonment for several years to death sentence as well. The law is titled as “Protection of the Family through Promoting the Culture of Hijab and Chastity” which was approved by parliament on September 20, 2023. Such kind of laws create a gender-based fear in society and are hazardous from every aspect. Imagine a woman being subjected to such harsh punishments for something which is not illegal and punishable in majority of the other countries. Further, it is also noteworthy to mention the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948 which states that “All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.” It signifies that all human beings are born free and are able to exercise their voices in a free and spirited manner.

The extremists who view and equate modesty of a woman in terms of wearing a hijab are to be disregarded as it hampers the very principles of gender equality. We should appreciate the examples in the past to have a bright future for all women. In 1923, in Egypt, Huda Shaarawi, a woman removed her veil in public as a sign of oppression faced by women which marked the beginning of Egyptian feminism. It shows that voices have been raised in the past which need to be reflected even in the contemporary global perspective. In Switzerland, recently, in 2025, they have passed a law which has banned facial coverings which is famously known as the burqa ban. This law prohibits facial coverings except under exceptional circumstances such as health concerns which will be punishable with fine.
Hijab as a sign of political identity need to be criticized and prohibited as it does not reflect the true intent of securing freedom of an individual. Anything which is exercised with free volition is a matter of choice that has to be respected; however, when it becomes a debate only from a politicized form of religious identity, it creates a threat to the society. This threat may take vicious forms in future for such women who are witnessing the rise of such practices which are fundamentally flawed if not exercised by prioritizing individual dignity and freedom.