US embassy cable - 03FRANKFURT8335

UNCLAS FRANKFURT 008335 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/AGS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM, PGOV, GM 
SUBJECT: HEADSCARF VERDICT LIKELY TO GENERATE NEW 
RESTRICTIONS ON RELIGIOUS EXPRESSION 
 
REF:  98 Frankfurt 6465; 00 Frankfurt 3078; 
 
      01 Frankfurt 6028 
 
1. SUMMARY: In a landmark decision, the Federal 
Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe ruled September 24 that 
Fereshta Ludin (a German teacher of Afghan descent) may 
teach in a public school without removing her headscarf, but 
strengthened the authority of German states to regulate 
religious expression.  Based on early media coverage, most 
states in SW Germany appear set to restrict religious 
expression by public employees.  In a five-to-three 
decision, the judges decided that while the plaintiff may 
wear her headscarf under the current Baden-Wuerttemberg 
constitution, state parliaments may pass laws regulating or 
forbidding the practice in schools.  Commentators predicted 
a new wave of restrictive laws, and complained that the 
mixed verdict will lead to more legal challenges.  END 
SUMMARY. 
 
2. In 1998, Fereshta Ludin (a teacher and German citizen 
from Afghanistan) applied for a position with civil servant 
status at a public school in Stuttgart (Baden-Wuerttemberg / 
B-W).  When Ludin stated that her Muslim religious beliefs 
require her to wear a headscarf during classroom 
instruction, the Stuttgart Office of Education rejected her 
candidacy.  In February 1999, Ludin filed a complaint at the 
Administrative Court in Stuttgart, which rejected her case 
in March 2000.  In follow-on appeals, the B-W State 
Administrative Court and the Federal Administrative Court in 
Berlin upheld the decision against Ludin, emphasizing the 
necessity of maintaining neutrality and the right of pupils 
not to be exposed to religious symbols (reftels). 
 
3. In its current decision, Germany's highest court framed 
the issue as a conflict between the need for neutrality in 
public schools and freedoms of religion and employment.  The 
majority held that the German Basic Law grants states far- 
reaching authority over education, including the power to 
regulate religious symbols and conditions of employment. 
The court held that state legislatures have the power to 
strike the balance between religious freedom and neutrality 
towards students.  Under the new verdict, community 
traditions and the religious make-up of the population are 
legitimate considerations, and various states may legislate 
different solutions.  The court returned the Ludin case to 
the Federal Administrative Court in Berlin, which can compel 
B-W to give Ludin a teaching certificate or can wait until 
the B-W state parliament enacts legislation (most likely a 
ban on headscarves for public school teachers). 
 
4. In a minority opinion, the dissenting judges argued that 
wearing a headscarf violates the neutrality required of 
civil servants.  The minority criticized also the court's 
insufficient guidance to the B-W state government on how to 
proceed until a new law is passed. 
 
5.  Local political leaders reacted cautiously to the 
verdict.  B-W Minister President Erwin Teufel (CDU - 
Christian Democratic Union) and Education Minister Annette 
Schavan (CDU) said only that they would carefully study the 
Karlsruhe decision.  All four parties in the B-W state 
parliament (CDU, SPD - Social Democrats, FDP - Free 
Democrats, and Greens), however, announced they would move 
quickly to pass legislation requiring neutrality in public 
schools (i.e., against headscarves).  Islamic leaders and 
human rights advocates criticized the verdict.  The chairman 
of the Central Council of Muslims in Germany, Nadeem Elyas, 
complained that the court did not guarantee the rights of 
Muslim women and indicated that Muslims will continue 
fighting restrictions. 
 
6. COMMENT:  The Fereshta Ludin verdict has opened the door 
for state parliaments to restrict religious expression in 
public employment.  Conservative governments in Baden- 
Wuerttemberg, Hesse, Saarland, and Bavaria, as well as the 
leftist government of Berlin, have announced that they will 
enact laws to ban the wearing of headscarves by public 
school teachers (Munich 0924).  Legislators in Rheinland- 
Pfalz (SPD-FDP), on the other hand, have indicated that they 
will not ban the practice.  Because the verdict upheld 
Ludin's right (for the moment) to wear a headscarf, a few 
conservative politicians have used the occasion to criticize 
the court's earlier "crucifix verdict" which requires 
schools to remove crosses from classroom walls if so 
requested.  Judging from media coverage, many non-Muslims in 
Germany appear unsympathetic to Ludin's cause, regarding it 
as an issue of professional duty rather than religious 
freedom.   The mixed verdict is likely to mean more lawsuits 
in those states that enact bans.  END COMMENT. 
 
BODDE