The Netherlands Approves Burqa Ban

Authored by Soeren Kern via The Gatestone Institute,

The Dutch Senate has approved a law that bans the wearing of "face-covering clothing" in public buildings, including hospitals, schools and government offices, as well as on public transportation.

Although the ban does not extend to public streets, the law authorizes police to ask individuals to remove face-covering clothing to establish their identity.

Those found flouting the ban — which includes Islamic veils and robes such as burqas (which cover the entire face) and niqabs (which cover the entire face except for the eyes), as well as balaclavas and full-face helmets — will be subject to a fine of 410 euros ($475).

The new law, previously adopted by the Dutch House of Representatives in November 2016, was approved on June 26 by 44 to 31 votes in the 75-seat Senate.

In a statement, the government, which has not yet said when the law will enter into effect, explained its purpose:

"In a free country like the Netherlands, everyone has the freedom and space to behave and dress as he or she desires. Sometimes, limits can and must be imposed on that freedom. In the case of face-covering clothing, this applies in particular if mutual communication is impeded or safety is jeopardized.

"Mutual communication whereby people can look each other in the face is so important that uniform rules have now been laid down by law. This makes it clear to everyone what is and is not allowed in those situations."

A Muslim activist group called "Stay away from my Niqab!" said the ban is unconstitutional. In an open letter sent to Dutch lawmakers, the group, which has more than 5,000 followers on Facebook, asked:

"Why is it not realized that this law leads to people being isolated from society? This ban leads to women who wear face-covering clothing, who like to participate in society, no longer to be able to do this effectively because they now have a restriction on education, license applications, travel with public transport, visiting a doctor and much more....

"Is the constitution no longer applicable to women with face-covering clothing? What about the right that everyone is free to dress how he/she wants, regardless of race, gender, religion or belief?

"What about Article 6 of the Constitution which sets out freedom of religion and belief? Is there a problem in which everyone does not have the right freely to confess their religion or belief, individually or in community with others?"

The group's spokeswoman, Karima Rahmani, added:

"We feel that we are being wronged with a repressive measure, which is why we trying to make our voices heard. It is getting harder and harder to be on the street with a niqab. I myself have been threatened with death, and other women have even been physically attacked.

"There is a lot of talk about me, but no one comes to me to ask: 'Why do you actually wear that niqab?' It is part of my religion and I want to be free to make that choice. It is a spiritual experience that I personally experience."

The Council of State, an independent advisor to the government on legislation, said that the ban was unnecessary and potentially unconstitutional. In a November 2015 report, it said that the Dutch Cabinet had been guided too much by "subjective feelings of insecurity" that "do not justify a ban." It added:

"The Council of State points out that the bill primarily seems to have been motivated by objections to wearing Islamic face-covering clothing.... Insofar as face-covering clothing (for example a burqa) is worn to express a religious clothing prescription, this falls under the constitutionally-protected freedom of religion. The ban proposed by the government does not, according to the Council of State, justify restricting the right to freedom of religion."

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), however, twice has ruled that burqa bans are legal, making it unlikely that the Dutch ban could be overturned in court.

Pictured: A person wearing an Islamic full-face covering in The Hague, Netherlands. (Image source: Patrick Rasenberg/Flickr CC by-NC 2.0)

In July 2017, for example, the ECHR upheld a Belgian ban on wearing the burqa in public spaces. It said that the government had been responding "to a practice that it considered to be incompatible, in Belgian society, with social communication and more generally the establishment of human relations, which were indispensable for life in society...essential to ensure the functioning of a democratic society." In July 2014, the ECHR upheld France's burqa ban, accepting the French government's argument that it encouraged citizens to "live together."

The Dutch government has repeatedly insisted that the ban is not about restricting religion but about promoting communication and public safety. It has describedthe new law as "religion neutral" because it is not limited just to the burka and niqab, but also includes the balaclava and full-face helmet.

Dutch Interior Minister Kajsa Ollongren said the new law represents "a fair balance" between "the freedom to dress as one wishes" and "the general interest of communication and security." She also said that far from violating fundamental rights, the ban will enable Muslim women "to have access to a wider social life" because if they do not cover the face "they will have more possibilities for contact, communication and opportunities to enter the job market."

A complete ban was originally proposed in December 2005 by Party for Freedom (PVV) leader Geert Wilders, who argued that burqas and niqabs are barriers to the integration of women in the Netherlands:

"We must ban the burqa. People's faces should not be hidden in society, for it is our faces that give us our identity and our fundamental means of communication with others."

The Netherlands is the sixth European country to approve a burqa ban, after France, Belgium, Bulgaria, Austria and Denmark. Bavaria in Germany, Catalonia in Spain, Lombardy in Italy and Ticino in Switzerland also have imposed regional burqa bans, while Norway has tabled a law to ban burqas in public schools. Latvia has proposed a burqa ban, but it has not yet been enacted.


macholatte TheSilentMajority Sun, 07/01/2018 - 12:23 Permalink

What took so long?
The muzzies will complain and get over it faster than the Sheeple will get over their guilt for having some spine and doing the right thing.

Whenever I see one of those creatures roaming the streets it gives me the willies. They really are spooks. Let us hope the burqa fashion show comes to an end everywhere.  Maybe the key is to make NOT wearing a burqa cool. Maybe the hair dressers need to have a global march to show solidarity for showing hair.  Yea. That’s it.


In reply to by TheSilentMajority

overbet macholatte Sun, 07/01/2018 - 12:35 Permalink

"Is the constitution no longer applicable to women with face-covering clothing? What about the right that everyone is free to dress how he/she wants, regardless of race, gender, religion or belief?"


So we wouldnt hear any complaints from this group if everyone decided they prefered to be naked all the time or chose to dress in g-strings only? That would also be the same freedom right?

In reply to by macholatte

brushhog overbet Sun, 07/01/2018 - 12:52 Permalink

I'm not a fan of government mandates, especially regarding one's choice of wardrobe. This is one of those instances where my personal bias toward muslims comes up hard against my belief in government limits and individual sovereignty.

I dont care for muslims, I dont like the culture, the history, the religious doctrines, or the effect of their growing presence on western society but I have to draw a line and say that government over-reach is probably a bigger thorn in my side. Just 'keeping it real' as they used to say.

In reply to by overbet

overbet brushhog Sun, 07/01/2018 - 13:15 Permalink

Just pointing out the hypocrisy. Muslims dont care about rights. They wont even allow a pic of their god. This freedom they speak of should also allow apply to me if I wanted to draw a cartoon of Allah. Would they say that I have the right to dress as I please if I decided to wear an Allah or pig face mask or better yet one half of the mask Allah and the other half a pigs face? Would that not be my right? 

As far as government regulation I agree the more they stay out of individuals lives the better, but I can also see the reason that in modern society one cant walk into a bank or casino with a mask on.

In reply to by brushhog

glenlloyd overbet Sun, 07/01/2018 - 13:41 Permalink

Fuckin aye man, you walk around town with a mask on you got cops stopping you wanting to know wtf you're doing, which I actually support because if you did do that I'd have to believe something's going on that shouldn't be.

Those who claim that we should bend over backward and be tolerant of Muslims I think you need to do some reading up on history of one of the most intolerant groups around.

I'm not saying that Christians have never been intolerant, they have. They burned the library at Alexandria and skinned the librarian, and the Inquisition to boot, these are dark days for religion in general, but I believe that Muslims are right in there with that sort of intolerant behavior.

In reply to by overbet

bigkahuna brushhog Sun, 07/01/2018 - 14:14 Permalink

In principle - if .gov can ban a clothing garment, .gov can get all up in peoples stuff later down the line, and hold the clothing ban up as an example -- "this was ok then, why is it not now?"

It is the law of unintended consequences. In this case the unintended delegation of this power to a bunch of sociopaths (politicians) -

So, I agree. They'll start with the wardrobe and work their way to God knows where. People forget that we are dealing with sociopaths on all sides of this issue. Would we rather have a bunch of weirdos running around looking like monsters, or a bunch of monsters raining down bs from newfound power they manage to grab? As is the case on almost all things, we must choose our shit sandwich.

In reply to by brushhog

yvhmer overbet Sun, 07/01/2018 - 13:03 Permalink

"Is the constitution no longer applicable to women with face-covering clothing? What about the right that everyone is free to dress how he/she wants, regardless of race, gender, religion or belief?"


These people are so integrated they are not aware The Netherlands, though in text has a "constitution, it is not in operation. It has been replaced by

1. International Treaties

2. Lisbon treaty


4. national law.

And, since 1953 there is no constitutional court no judge, so, no Dutch judge in NL is allowed to test a law against the constitution, unlike in US. A Dutch judge is only allowed to consider certain situations whether they are covered or not by the law. Quite a word in this regard. ....:-).


In reply to by overbet

HRClinton macholatte Sun, 07/01/2018 - 12:51 Permalink













In reply to by macholatte

lincolnsteffens mrtoad Sun, 07/01/2018 - 17:46 Permalink

The average human temperature is just shy of 99 degrees F. . Try going out in a hot 125+ degrees in shorts and a tee shirt and see how you like it. Covering yourself in multiple layers, especially a light colored outer garment will keep you closer to 99 degrees than the roasted guy in a tee shirt and shorts. It is called insulation. The black color in those climates I don't get.


In reply to by mrtoad

econometrical macholatte Sun, 07/01/2018 - 14:55 Permalink

I have to agree-- those burqas give me the willies, too!!.. It's

just not natural to dress like that-- esp. in hot weather??..

Those women seem SO oppressed-- no identity, no individuality,

hardly any legal rights or recourse, etc....They look like they are

in perpetual mourning-- maybe for themselves!?....


I want to respect their culture & religion, but aspects of that religious

tradition and culture also encourage men to beat their wives & in some

cases, even kill them if they look at someone the wrong way!!??...

They throw acid at women, stone them, keep them from driving

or working or getting an education...Not to mention the child marriages,

rape, & wife, daughter, & sister "honor killings"??...(really happens!)....

Sorry, but that's where the "Freedom of Religion" ends!!...


If you are in a foreign country, & fully availing yourself of its rights & privileges,

then you also should adhere to its standards. Likewise, I think women in

Muslim countries should wear a scarf or hijab, as a courtesy...


In reply to by macholatte

One of these i… macholatte Sun, 07/01/2018 - 16:05 Permalink

If I were ever to join a revolutionary group which took clandestine actions, the burka woudl be a godsend to me.

As it is, by next april the first I will own one in my size... :c)

Admittedly for any criminals outhere thinking "Hmm would be good idea for a heist" just think about the type of getaway car that you would have to use in order to pull it off.. Them moslim boys drive the Jags and Mercs themselves, the ladies geenrally drive whatever was cheap and big (has to be for the fifty kids) on salims "discount motorz" lot

In reply to by macholatte

Trisy Yukon Cornholius Sun, 07/01/2018 - 12:23 Permalink

Al-Baqarah 2:144

We have certainly seen the turning of your face, [O Muhammad], toward the heaven, and We will surely turn you to a qiblah with which you will be pleased. So turn your face toward al-Masjid al-Haram. And wherever you [believers] are, turn your faces toward it [in prayer]. Indeed, those who have been given the Scripture well know that it is the truth from their Lord. And Allah is not unaware of what they do.

by this, it is clear that the face is our identity too in islam, Allah swt didn't wrote to turn your self, but your face [as it representing the ruh/spirit the self id], so we shouldn't cover it by religion.

indeed this was a tribal culture some one transfered into islam.

the woman should be covered till the neck, the hair and the ears but not the face.

In reply to by Yukon Cornholius