Britain's top judge says Muslim women should be allowed to wear veils in court

President of the Supreme Court in Britain says courts and judges should show respect towards different customs

Britain’s senior most judge has said that Muslim women should be allowed to appear in court wearing a full-face veil.

The president of the Supreme Court in Britain, Lord Neuberger, said it was essential that courts and judges show respect towards different customs.

“Judges have to show, and have to be seen to show, respect to everybody equally, and that requires an understanding of different cultural and social habits," he said.

“Well known examples include how some religions consider it inappropriate to take the oath, how some people consider it rude to look other people in the eye, how some women find it inappropriate to appear in public with their face uncovered, and how some people deem it inappropriate to confront others or to be confronted – for instance with an outright denial,” he added.

Read: Pregnant Muslim woman in France attacked for wearing headscarf

Neuberger’s statement comes during a time of uncertainty regarding the acceptance of the face veil or niqab in Britain’s legal system.

In 2013, the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Thomas, urged there was a need for clear guidance on the issue of wearing face veils to court, following a controversy over the trial at a London court of a Muslim woman accused of witness intimidation.

Rebekah Dawson was told she would be forced to take off her face veil if she gave evidence, which she declined to do. She was later jailed for six months after changing her plea to guilty.

“It is necessary to have some understanding as to how people from different cultural, social, religious or other backgrounds think and behave and how they expect others to behave,” Neuberger asserted, while insisting during his address that courts should be less intimidating.

“More broadly, judges should be courteous and, generally, good-humoured; and, while they should be firm, they should never, however great the temptation, lose their temper."

Read: Chinese court jails Muslim for 6 years for growing beard, wife gets 2 years for wearing veil

In his address to the Criminal Justice Alliance, Lord Neuberger said judges and lawyers often failed to recognise how “artificial and intimidating” courts could be for ordinary people, adding, “I sometimes wonder whether our trial procedures really are the best way of getting at the truth.”

“Would you feel that you had given your best if you had been forced to give evidence in unfamiliar surroundings, with lots of strangers watching, in an intimidating court, with lawyers in funny clothes asking questions, often aggressively and trying to catch you out, and with no ability to tell the story as you remember it?”

However, Neuberger clarified it did not mean a call for a major transformation of court proceedings but said judges, lawyers and court staff must do as much as possible to help people feel at ease in court.

Seconding the top judge’s statements, Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain Dr Shuja Shafi said, "A judge who respects and is attuned to the sensitivities of those in the court room should hopefully expect better results. In the case of the minority of those people who do cover their face for religious, cultural or any other reason, they should be allowed to do so unless the situation demands otherwise."

But Executive Director of the National Secular Society Keith Porteous Wood upheld that no direction was being taken over the issue.

“It was a missed opportunity, however, not to acknowledge that occasionally – for example on a defendant wearing a full face veil – doing so might conflict with justice being seen to be done, or even justice being done.”

“My concern is not theoretical; it is now 18 months since a judge at Blackfriars Crown Court wasted a great deal of court time dealing with the question of full-face veils, and made a heartfelt plea for central guidance to avoid this inefficient use of expensive court’s resources being replicated elsewhere. The Lord Chief Justice’s office has been dealing with this for a long time but seems disappointingly reluctant to issue any direction,” he added.

This article originally appeared on The Telegraph.