Aujourd’hui, l’Assemblée nationale (Today, the National Assembly) a voté (voted for) l’interdiction du port du voile intégral. A law banning the full-face veil, or voile intégral, has already been passed in the lower house of le parlement belge (Belgian parliament). When we discussed that law in April (The Burqa Ban in Belgium, April 30), le débat a été assez chaud. Our discussion was pretty heated, with many opinions on the appropriateness of the law and the future of the veil in Western Europe.

Toujours au centre de la discussion actuelle de la culture et de l’identité française (still at the center of the current discussion of French culture and identity), abordons un peu la nouvelle loi (let’s discuss a bit the new law)

La loi prohibe (the law prohibits) “la dissimulation du visage,”which is the hiding of one’s face, not necessarily the wearing of a burqa or niqab. Mais elle “interdit de fait le port du niqab ou de la burqa dans tout l’espace public” (“L’Assemblée nationale vote l’interdiction du port du voile intégral”). The same article notes that only 2,000 women are thought to be affected by the new law.

The law is being reviewed by le Conseil d’État (the Council of State, France’s highest legal advisory body), who will consider its compatibilité with la constitution française et la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme (the French constitution and the European Convention on Human Rights). The concern is that the freedom of those 2,000 women to openly practice their religion is curtailed by the new law for no reason other than their religious identity.

This conflict between la laïcité de l’État (the secularism of the state), l’égalité(equality) et la liberté des citoyens (the freedom of citizens) calls into question some of France’s dearest principles. The consensus in the French government appears to be anti-burqa/niqab, as evidenced by the abstention of the opposition parties from today’s vote “tout en étant résolument opposée(s) au port du niqab et de la burqa” (while being resolutely opposed to the wearing of the niqab and the burqa).

It’s hard to see this as a constructive step in France’s evolving conception of its identité nationale. In 2007, Nicolas Sarkozy created a Ministère de l’Immigration, de l’Intégration, de l’Identité nationale et du Développement solidaire(Ministry of Immigration, Integration, National Identity and Co-Development). The creation of the ministry was controversial, with Doudou Diène, rapporteur spécial de l’ONU contre le racisme (special rapporteur, or investigator, of the UN against racism), recognizing it as une « lecture ethnique et raciale des questions politiques, économiques et sociales et le traitement idéologique et politique de l’immigration comme un enjeu sécuritaire et comme une menace à l’identité nationale » (voir l’article).

Diène’s reconnaissance, that France is assigning an ethnic and racial reading to political, economic and social questions, and treating immigration as a security issue and menace to national identity, is, for me, spot-on. Instead of voting 335 to one for legislation against la voile musulmane (the Muslim veil), perhaps France could agree to recognize that it is on the wrong path in treating an unfamiliar racial or ethnic issue as a threat worthy of legislation. Opening an honest and inclusive debate on the question might achieve more stabilité than the proposed €150 amende (fine).