STRASBOURG - The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) debated on Tuesday complaint of two Turkish female students wearing Islamic-style headscarf.
Zeynep Tekin, a student at the Ege University Nursery Academy, and Leyla Sahin, a student at the Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine, applied to the Court by claiming that they were given disciplinary punishments because they had insisted on attending the classes with their Islamic-style headscarf. They also claimed that these punishments were violations of human rights.
In their application, Tekin and Sahin defended that Turkey had violated Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
During the hearing, Sukru Alpaslan, the lawyer of Turkish government, said, ''the Constitution bans exploitation of religion. Article 14 of the Constitution includes several arrangements about this ban. Secularism is an indispensable implementation in order to protect democratic order in Turkey. Education in the country should be in harmony with the secularism principle of the Constitution. Education is under control of the state. According to the Higher Education Board (YOK) Law, higher education aims at giving education to students in line with principles of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Since headscarf symbolizes religious feelings, it contradicts with the secularism principle. Democratic state is a secular state.''
Stressing that decisions taken by the Constitutional Court were binding for all institutions, Alpaslan said, ''in addition to the decision saying that students wearing headscarf cannot enter universities, Islamic-style headscarf is a symbol against principles of the Republic. Such a situation can lead to a chaos in the country. It also contradicts with the principle of secular education. Islamic-style headscarf is a step back in our target of modernization. The issue of headscarf is not a matter of individual freedom, but a matter used by politicians to exploit religion.''
''If Islamic-style headscarf is indispensable for religion, it express loyalty to religious order, not implementation of freedoms. And it contradicts with the principle of secularism,'' he said.
''Islamic-style headscarf is not banned in normal life in Turkey. But education is a public area. Meanwhile, Islamic-style headscarf worn by fundamentalists should not be compared with the tradition of headscarf in Turkey. If a person takes place in secular education system, he or she should abide by the rules. Europe in which Muslim population lives should also respond this question. Also, requests for religious marriage, working hours and religious timetable can be brought onto agenda,'' he added.
Meanwhile, Halit Celik, the lawyer of Leyla Sahin, defended, ''there is not any other prohibitor country like Turkey among democratic countries. My client feels herself naked when she takes off her headscarf.''
Noting that wife of Prime Minister Abdullah Gul was not accepted to the university because of her headscarf, Sahin said, ''insistence of Turkey about the ban on headscarf has increased since February 28, 1997. Definition of those wearing headscarf as opponents of modernization, contradicts with the principles of patience and tolerance. Principle of secular state envisages equal treatment to all religions. On the contrary, initiatives aiming at destroying a religious belief are in question in Turkey.''
The ECHR which listened to views of the sides at today's hearing, will announce its decision later.