From The Daily Mail U.K.
Muslim woman who hasn’t shown her face in public for 18 years ordered to remove veil to give evidence in Australian court
By Richard Shears
Last updated at 1:11 PM on 19th August 2010
An Australian judge has ordered a witness to remove her niqab, a veil which leaves only the eyes visible. (File photo)
A strict Muslim woman who says she has never shown her face in public, has been ordered by a female judge to remove her veil when she gives evidence in an Australian court.
District Court judge Shauna Deane said in the Western Australian Supreme Court today that in the interest of a fair trial against a man accused of fraud, she should not be allowed to wear a niqab, which allows only the eyes to be seen.
The 36-year-old woman, known only as Tasneem, said she was a strict Muslim and it was against her religion to show her face anywhere except in the confines of her home.
The defence has argued that her whole face should be seen so the jury could decide on the veracity of her evidence.
But prosecutor Mark Ritter told the court that Tasneem had not shown her face in public in more than 18 years and would find it stressful to reveal her features to strange men.
The judge agreed that the jury should have the opportunity to assess the facial expressions of the Islamic Studies teacher to help weigh up her credibility as a witness.
Her decision, she added, was not to set a precedent for other courts – it was up to them to assess similar circumstances on a case-by-case basis.
Tasneem worked at a school as a tutor where the accused man, Anwar Sayed, ran the Muslim Ladies College in Perth’s southern suburbs. He has been accused of stealing up to £400,000 in public funds by artificially inflating student numbers.
Outside the court Mr Sayed said he was worried about his safety and that of the witness but pointed out that he had no objection to the niqab being worn in court.
‘This was a legal matter in which I had no role to play,’ he said.
He claimed he had been stabbed the previous week after receiving death threats in hand-written notes and phone calls about the niqab issue.
One of his lawyers, Mr Ludher Swaran, said the accused man had become ‘quite isolated’ within the Muslim community.
‘There is quite a bit of pressure on him. He is a Muslim, the witness is a Muslim, the issue of a niqab is very sensitive among Muslims, so he would rather not have had this argument done in court.’
Mr Swaran said Mr Sayed had been stabbed with a bottle in the attack.
‘His shirt was torn, there were lacerations on his chest, lacerations on his forehead.’
A date is to be set for the hearing.
What’s the bet it will only take 18 seconds for them to tell her to cover her butt-ugly face up again?
Case dismissed!
The order should be that if you do not remove the mask forthwith, it will be treated as contempt of court – in fact contempt of the Crown courts, or contempt of the Crown. That means all protections of the Crown are removed. If the person is a citizen, contempt of the Crown also means removal of citizenship and removal from the realm, with no appeal.
This used to be the case in time of commonsense.
Frankly, that should be the case in Britain, and the old commonwealth.
PS: Wonder how long it will be for all Muslims in the UK and old commonwealth became ardent Royalists.
But her word only counts as half, right??
I agree Gene her word is only half that of a man. She should not be allowed out of the house without a male guardian in case she is tempted to do something immoral that could get her stoned to death. In such a case as this she should Islamically speaking listen to the male judge and then confer with her male guardian as to the proper course of action as she is deficient in intelligence according to her prophet.