{"id":40110,"date":"2021-03-01T09:36:33","date_gmt":"2021-03-01T08:36:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/?p=40110"},"modified":"2021-03-01T09:36:33","modified_gmt":"2021-03-01T08:36:33","slug":"islamic-community-condemns-ecj-opinion-on-the-headscarf","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/islamic-community-condemns-ecj-opinion-on-the-headscarf\/","title":{"rendered":"Islamic Community condemns ECJ opinion on the headscarf"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>\u201cWe are confronted with another attempt to render Muslim life in Europa impossible\u201d, said Bekir Alta\u015f, secretary general of the IGMG. Behind it is an opinion presented by Athanasios Rantos, Advocate General of the ECJ, on two employment-related cases from Germany. According to the Advocate General, an employer could permit the wearing of smaller religious symbols and forbid larger ones like the headscarf. <\/strong><\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe Advocate General\u2019s opinion is perfidious: He wants the court to adopt a decision which practically targets the headscarf only. All other religious \u2018symbols\u2019, however, remain unconcerned. This is another attempt to restrict European Muslims\u2019 freedom of religion by means of special arrangements. We note such efforts with deep concern and call on the ECJ judges to put an end to it with an unambiguous decision. <\/p>\n<p>What the Advocate General cannot demand openly, he tries to achieve by a sleight of hand: He wants a ruling which on the surface focuses on the size of the \u2018symbol\u2019. The result, however, would be a discrimination against Muslim women and a violation of the principle of equality. That is as predictable as it is unacceptable.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>\u201cWe are confronted with another attempt to render Muslim life in Europa impossible\u201d, said Bekir Alta\u015f, secretary general of the IGMG. Behind it is an opinion presented by Athanasios Rantos, Advocate General of the ECJ, on two employment-related cases from Germany. According to the Advocate General, an employer could permit the wearing of smaller religious symbols and forbid larger ones like the headscarf. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":39720,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ngg_post_thumbnail":0},"categories":[23241],"tags":[24771,24778,24777,24780,24770,24779],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40110"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=40110"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40110\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":40111,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/40110\/revisions\/40111"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/39720"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=40110"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=40110"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.igmg.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=40110"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}