Around 1,300 Danes marched through Copenhagen on Wednesday in protest at a new ban on the wearing of face veils in public, accusing the government of infringing on women’s right to dress as they choose.

Denmark’s parliament enacted the ban in May, joining France and some other European Union countries to uphold what some politicians say are secular and democratic values.

The protesters, many wearing the niqab veil or the all-enveloping, body-length burqa, marched from the central, left-wing district of Norrebro to Bellahoj police station on the outskirts of the capital. They formed a human chain around the station and then marched back to Norrebro before dispersing.

Demonstrators, often with children in tow, chanted “no racists in our streets” and “my life, my choice” during the three-hour rally. No incidents were reported.

The marchers included non-niqab-wearing Muslim women and non-Muslim Danes with faces covered.

“We need to send a signal to the government that we will not bow to discrimination and a law that specifically targets a religious minority,” Sabina, 21, a niqab-garbed student, told Reuters, asking that her full name not be used.

She is one of about 150-200 Muslim women – 0.1 percent of those in the country – who daily wear either the niqab or burqa garments covering the face or the entire body. Muslims account for around 5 per cent of Denmark’s 5.7 million population.

Under the law, police will be able to instruct women to remove their veils or order them to leave public areas. Justice Minister Soren Pape Poulsen said officers would fine them and tell them to go home.

Fines will range from 1,000 Danish crowns (121.87 pounds) for a first offence to 10,000 crowns for a fourth.

DISCRIMINATORY, CRITICS SAY

Despite its generic wording, the legislation is being widely interpreted as discriminating against Denmark’s Muslims and violating women’s right to freedom of expression and religion.

Critics, noting the tiny number of Muslim women in Denmark who actually wear a niqab, regard the law as largely a sop to increased anti-immigrant sentiment in the Nordic country.

“If the intention of this law was to protect women’s rights, it fails abjectly,” said Fotis Filippou, deputy Europe director of human rights group Amnesty International. “Instead, the law criminalises women for their choice of clothing – making a mockery of the freedoms Denmark purports to uphold.”

Police said none of the veiled protesters would be penalised since certain uses of face veils, such as to exercise freedom of speech as part of a peaceful protest, are exempt from the law.

The justice ministry explained that the ban would focus on women forced by their families to wear veils, though it has been faulted for vagueness in stipulating who would fall foul of it.

Danish Police Union chief Claus Oxfeldt said he would have preferred more comprehensive guidance on how to enforce the ban.

“We need as thorough guidance as possible so we don’t end up in situations where (police officers) don’t 100 per cent know how to act,” he said.

As an example, he was unsure whether Asian tourists wearing anti-pollution masks would be covered by the ban.

France – with the largest Muslim community in the EU – as well as Belgium, the Netherlands, Bulgaria and the German state of Bavaria, have all imposed some curbs on face veils in public.

France’s controversial 2011 ban added to a broader sense of alienation felt by many Muslims and some evidence surfaced that it encouraged assaults in the street on women wearing still legal headscarves as well.

A Daily Express article which suggested that burqa sales are on the rise in Blackburn contains some basic errors.

The headline “Burka sales BOOM” can serve to reinforce the imagery of religiosity and violence. Imagery that has featured in counter-jihad circles since 2006.

The Other Islamic Bomb => pic.twitter.com/RlcqQwal2i

— Scott M (@EVdeals1) April 27, 2013

Describing a ‘sales boom’ is a journalistic cliche and not instrincially offensive. In this context, however, it lacks sensitivity.

The central claim of the article weakens under scrutiny. Paul Baldwin, the Express journalist, only interviewed a single store owner. And Baldwin acknowledges that ‘exact figures are hard to establish because many burkas are sold door-to-door’.

Nadeem Siddiqui has seen a rise in sales. His Hijab Centre in Blackburn went from selling ‘one or two burkas a month’ to ‘one or two in a week’. It’s a rise but it hardly meets the inflated claims of the headline.

The Express also carried out a ‘snap survey’ in the town and ‘found around 30 per cent of muslim women completely covered their faces’. That figure sounds daunting when the journalist had just informed readers that Muslims make up 11 per cent of the local population.

It turns out that the journalist spoke to just twenty women who wear the niqab or burqa. And given their campaign to publicly ban this veil is it any wonder they declined to be named or photographed?Nor is the campaign anything new.

The Express ran a front page in favour of a ban on October 21, 2006. It also claimed in 2006 that “An astounding 97% of Daily Express readers agreed a ban would help to safeguard racial harmony.” Much of the 2006 debate was influenced by former Labour MP Jack Straw’s public opposition to the face veil.  Straw reaffirmed his position to the Express a decade later.

Last month the newspaper claimed that 12,000 readers want a ban the burqa. The language of the survey demonstrates how to ask a leading question. Understanding polling methodologies is important.

Ukip deputy leader Paul Nuttall MEP has also called for a ban in a party where members deploy Islamophobic rhetoric when politically expedient.

Debates on the burqa are nothing new and have stretched as far as Australia. Some European countries have issued public bans despite a minority of women wearing face veils. Cameroon and Chad issued bans following acts of domestic terrorism.

The article claims that the popularity of the niqab and burqa grows in other northern towns and London. In the absence of evidence, however, comes insinuation.

Some individuals direct their anxieties and rage towards Islam and Muslims at individuals they perceive as Muslim. Some white converts experience religious slurs dressed in the language of race. Racialisation means that non-white Muslims, especially Sikhs, face violence and racist abuse.

A decision to wear (or remove) Islamic veils clothing is more nuanced. In one example, a London youth worker started wearing the hijab after suffering Islamophobic abuse. This trend, some argue, continued in a post-9/11 climate. A point raised by Nadeem Siddiqui, who runs the Hijab Centre in Blackburn.

Others removed their headscarf or hid it after experiencing abuse. Violence and verbal abuse against Muslim women who wear Islamic veils continues to cause concern. Comments posted below the Express article or in far-right channels contain many dehumanising slurs.

These views overlook the varieties and experiences of the religious life. And ignores the fact that some just pick and choose the verses that speaks to their own cultural specificities.

The popularity of the Express’s campaign reflects how anxieties and prejudices towards Islam and Muslim evolve and grow. And how misleading stories appeal to the echo-chambers of those prepared to believe the worst about Muslims in Britain.

The post Are sales of the burqa and niqab on the rise? appeared first on Religious Reader.