PROCEDURE

The case originated in an application (no. 4619/12) against the Kingdom of Belgium lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) by a Belgian national, Ms Fouzia Dakir (“the applicant”), on 22 December 2011.

The applicant was represented by Ms I. Wouters a lawyer practising in Brussels. The Belgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr M. Tysebaert, Senior Adviser, Federal Justice Department.

The applicant complained that the ban on wearing in public places clothing designed to conceal the face deprived her of the possibility of wearing the full-face veil. She alleged a violation of Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention, taken separately and in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention. She alleged, further, that she had not had an effective remedy before the Conseil d’Etat (Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention).

On 9 July 2015 the Government were given notice of the above-mentioned complaints and the remainder of the application was declared inadmissible pursuant to Rule 54 § 3 of the Rules of Court.

The non-governmental organisation Liberty and the Human Rights Centre of Ghent University were given leave to submit written comments (Article 36 § 2 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 3).

THE FACTS

I. THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE

The applicant was born in 1977 and lives in Dison.

The applicant stated that she was a Muslim and had decided, on her own initiative, to wear the niqab – a veil covering the face except for the eyes – in accordance with her religious beliefs. She said that she had taken the decision to wear the full-face veil when she was sixteen years old. She explained that her choice had been accepted by her family and friends and by her husband. She also stated that she had always agreed to remove her veil for identification purposes as required by the authorities, such as when issuing her identity card.

On 18 February 2008 the Vesdre district administrative authorities proposed an amendment to the district regulations regarding the wearing of the burqa in public thoroughfares and in public places ... .

The president of the police district invited the Verviers public prosecutor to express an opinion on that proposal. On 18 March 2008 the public prosecutor replied that he did not have any observations to make.

The municipal councils of the three municipalities belonging to the police district – the municipal council of Pepinster on 23 June 2008, Dison on 26 June 2008 and Verviers on 30 June 2008 – enacted the following provisions of the consolidated by-laws of the Vesdre police district, which differed, moreover, from the original proposal. “Article 113. Save where authorised by the mayor (Bourgmestre) of the municipality, wearing a mask or using any strategem whatsoever for the purposes of concealing personal identity shall be forbidden at all times, at any public meeting and in all public places and in public thoroughfares. ... Article 113bis. The wearing of clothing concealing the face shall be forbidden at all times and in all public places. However, a helmet, balaclava or other headgear may be worn where authorised by the legislation on the safety of workers or other legislation. ...

On 29 August 2008 the applicant lodged an application with the Conseil d’État for annulment of Article 113bis. She argued that the provision in question expressly targeted the Islamic veil, which she wore, and that the resulting ban constituted an interference with her rights guaranteed by Articles 8, 9 and 10 of the Convention and discrimination in breach of Article 14 of the Convention. She contended that the interference did not pursue a legitimate aim as the principle of secularism was not a constitutional principle and there could therefore be no blanket ban on wearing the veil. In any event, even supposing that the aim could be regarded as legitimate, the applicant maintained that the means were disproportionate in the absence of public disorder or threat of public disorder and thus of a pressing social need. In their memorial in reply of 18 April 2011, the three municipalities submitted that the impugned provision sought to guarantee public safety and not to regulate or restrict the exercise of any form of worship.

The auditeur at the Conseil d’État delivered a detailed 26-page report in which he concluded that in his opinion the applicant’s above-mentioned submission was well founded because public safety could not serve as a basis for a ban on wearing the full-face veil in all places generally open to the public, as no specific public disorder was associated with it as such.

In judgment no. 213.849 of 15 June 2011, the Conseil d’État, refusing to follow the opinion of the auditeur, dismissed the application for annulment of the provision ... .

That judgment was served on the applicant on 23 June 2011.
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e1
001-175660_a11_em1
CODE
DIRECT
4619/12
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e2
001-175660_a11_em2
ORG
NO_MASK
Kingdom of Belgium
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e3
001-175660_a11_em3
DEM
NO_MASK
Belgian
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e4
001-175660_a11_em4
PERSON
DIRECT
Ms Fouzia Dakir
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e5
001-175660_a11_em5
DATETIME
QUASI
22 December 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e6
001-175660_a11_em6
PERSON
QUASI
Ms I. Wouters
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e7
001-175660_a11_em7
ORG
NO_MASK
Brussels
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e2
001-175660_a11_em8
ORG
NO_MASK
001-175660_a11_em2
Belgian Government
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e8
001-175660_a11_em9
PERSON
QUASI
Mr M. Tysebaert
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e9
001-175660_a11_em10
ORG
NO_MASK
Federal Justice Department
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e10
001-175660_a11_em11
MISC
QUASI
conceal the face
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e11
001-175660_a11_em12
MISC
QUASI
full-face veil
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e12
001-175660_a11_em13
ORG
NO_MASK
Conseil d’Etat
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e13
001-175660_a11_em14
DATETIME
QUASI
9 July 2015
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e14
001-175660_a11_em15
ORG
QUASI
Liberty
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e15
001-175660_a11_em16
ORG
NO_MASK
Human Rights Centre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e16
001-175660_a11_em17
ORG
QUASI
Ghent University
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e17
001-175660_a11_em18
DATETIME
QUASI
1977
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e18
001-175660_a11_em19
LOC
QUASI
Dison
BELIEF
check
001-175660_a11_e19
001-175660_a11_em20
DEM
QUASI
Muslim
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e20
001-175660_a11_em21
MISC
QUASI
niqab
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e11
001-175660_a11_em22
MISC
QUASI
full-face veil
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e21
001-175660_a11_em23
DEM
QUASI
sixteen years old
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e22
001-175660_a11_em24
DATETIME
QUASI
18 February 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e23
001-175660_a11_em25
LOC
QUASI
Vesdre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e24
001-175660_a11_em26
MISC
QUASI
burqa
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e25
001-175660_a11_em27
LOC
QUASI
Verviers
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e26
001-175660_a11_em28
DATETIME
QUASI
18 March 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e27
001-175660_a11_em29
ORG
QUASI
municipal council of Pepinster
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e28
001-175660_a11_em30
DATETIME
QUASI
23 June 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e18
001-175660_a11_em31
LOC
QUASI
Dison
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e29
001-175660_a11_em32
DATETIME
QUASI
26 June 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e25
001-175660_a11_em33
LOC
QUASI
Verviers
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e30
001-175660_a11_em34
DATETIME
QUASI
30 June 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e23
001-175660_a11_em35
LOC
QUASI
Vesdre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
correct
001-175660_a11_e31
001-175660_a11_em36
MISC
NO_MASK
Bourgmestre
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e32
001-175660_a11_em37
DATETIME
QUASI
29 August 2008
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e33
001-175660_a11_em38
ORG
QUASI
Conseil d’État
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e34
001-175660_a11_em39
MISC
QUASI
Islamic veil
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e35
001-175660_a11_em40
MISC
QUASI
wearing the veil
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e36
001-175660_a11_em41
DATETIME
QUASI
18 April 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e33
001-175660_a11_em42
ORG
NO_MASK
Conseil d’État
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
insert
001-175660_a11_e37
001-175660_a11_em43
QUANTITY
NO_MASK
26-page
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e11
001-175660_a11_em44
MISC
QUASI
full-face veil
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e38
001-175660_a11_em45
CODE
DIRECT
213.849
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e39
001-175660_a11_em46
DATETIME
QUASI
15 June 2011
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e33
001-175660_a11_em47
ORG
NO_MASK
Conseil d’État
NOT_CONFIDENTIAL
check
001-175660_a11_e40
001-175660_a11_em48
DATETIME
QUASI
23 June 2011
Fouzia Dakir
BEL
CHAMBER
Task: Annotate the document to anonymise the following person: Fouzia Dakir