US embassy cable - 04FRANKFURT1390

UNCLAS FRANKFURT 001390 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR EUR/AGS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PHUM, PGOV, GM 
SUBJECT: GERMAN STATE FIRST TO BAN HEADSCARVES ON PUBLIC 
SCHOOL TEACHERS 
 
REF:  A) 98 Frankfurt 6465; B) 00 Frankfurt 3078; 
      C) 01 Frankfurt 6028; D) 03 Frankfurt 8335 
      E) 04 Hamburg 0001 
 
1. (U) SUMMARY:  On April 1, Baden-Wuerttemberg (B-W) will 
become the first German state to ban the use of headscarves 
by teachers in public schools.  The new law does not apply 
to students (unlike in France) and specifically permits 
Christian and Jewish symbols.  A wide majority of 
legislators have voiced broad support for the ban, proposed 
in reaction to a lawsuit by Muslim educator Fereshta Ludin 
(reftels).  State politicians see Ms. Ludin as an extremist 
and view the headscarf as a divisive political symbol rather 
than protected religious expression. 
 
2. (U) As defendant in the Ludin constitutional court case 
(ref D), the B-W state government is rushing to enact 
Germany's first law banning headscarves, arguing that the 
state must defend the neutrality of public schools and 
oppose discrimination against women.  B-W Minister for 
Education, Annette Schavan (Christian Democrat/CDU), 
presented the draft law on February 4, calling the headscarf 
a political symbol for "the suppression of women [and] an 
interpretation of Islam contrary to the principle of equal 
rights for men and women" and therefore contrary to the 
German constitution.  Schavan defended allowing Christian 
and Jewish symbols in public schools, since the B-W state 
constitution says education should be based on Christian and 
Jewish traditions (articles 12, 15, and 16). 
 
3. (SBU) There is overwhelming legislative support for the 
ban.  Social Democratic/SPD reps argue that teachers who 
wear headscarves undermine the integration of Muslim women 
into mainstream society.  SPD legislators Nils Schmid and 
Herbert Moser told a Consulate representative that schools 
must not reinforce discrimination against women, calling 
Ludin's legal campaign an affront to the German 
constitution.  Both are confident that the courts will 
uphold the law.  Citing a confidential source at the Federal 
Constitutional Court, Moser repeated something echoed by 
other sources as well, namely that Ludin's court fees are 
paid by the Islamic lobby group Milli Goerues (as additional 
"justification" for the accusation that Ludin has a 
political rather than a religious agenda).  By way of 
example, Schmid -- who recently visited the U.S. on an IV 
program -- pointed to his wife, a devout Muslim who strongly 
opposes the headscarf. 
 
4. (U) A handful of politicians argue the law goes too far 
in banning expression.  Greens caucus leader Winfried 
Kretschmann called for allowing headscarves unless schools 
or communities object.  FDP (Free Democrat) representatives 
support the ban, but -- like Greens -- express concerns that 
the German high court may strike down the law's preferential 
treatment of Christian and Jewish symbols. 
 
5. (SBU) Within the state government, experts support the 
ban but worry about its consequences.  The state's special 
representative for minorities, Christian Storr, opined 
privately that Ludin has become the mouthpiece of the 
Islamic fundamentalists who bankroll her legal battles. 
Storr voiced concern that the ban could spur economic or 
social discrimination against Muslim women who choose to 
wear a headscarf.  Storr expects that the Federal 
Constitutional Court will find fault with the new law's 
special treatment of Christian and Jewish symbols, adding to 
the legal uncertainty.  NOTE:  The law leaves open the 
question of customs vital to other religious minorities -- 
both women and men -- for instance Sikh headdress.  END 
NOTE. 
 
6. (U) COMMENT:  The B-W government is hurriedly enacting 
the ban in reaction to the verdict in the Ludin case (ref 
D), since failure to pass new legislation might compel 
Baden-Wuerttemberg to give Ms. Ludin a teaching position. 
Because the draft law gives preferential treatment to the 
Christian and Jewish religions, however, it is unlikely to 
become the last word on this question.  END COMMENT. 
 
PASI