Closing the Gates to Education

Violation of Rights of Muslim Women Students in India

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................................ 2

Key Events and Dates ................................................................................................................................... 3

Violation of Constitutional and Fundamental Rights of Students ............................................................. 4

Role of Different Institutions and Instrumentalities ................................................................................... 5

Role of the Educational Bureaucracy .............................................................................................. 5

Role of the Police .............................................................................................................................. 5

Role of Hindutva Organizations in Amplifying Hatred................................................................. 5

Role of Kannada TV Media – Weaponising the Camera............................................................... 6

The Politics of Banning the Hijab ................................................................................................................ 6

Role of Civil Society ....................................................................................................................................... 7

Legal Analysis Of High Court and Supreme Court Judgements ................................................................ 7

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................................... 8

of Muslim women students in Karnataka

Page 1 of 8
Executive Summary

On December 31, 2021, Government Girls PU College, Udupi imposed an arbitrary restriction on girls
wearing the hijab to college leading right up to the split verdict by the Supreme Court on the
constitutionality of the hijab ban on October 13, 2022, Karnataka witnessed increasing restrictions on
the right to wear the hijab and consequently on the right to education, dignity and expression of Muslim
girl students.

When students protested against the arbitrary hijab restriction in the Kundapura Government PU
College in December of 2022, the Karnataka government issued a notification, which in essence,
allowed for restrictions on the hijab in PU colleges, government schools and private schools. With
respect to institutions which do not have any dress Code, the Government Order1 held that such
institutions must ensure that the students’ attire must accord with ‘equality & integrity’ and should not
disrupt the ‘public order’.

It was this Government Order (GO) which was challenged in the Karnataka High Court, in Resham v.
Karnataka.2 The Court finally upheld the constitutionality of this GO on the 15 th of March 2022.

The judgement did not include, in its ambit, a directive to any educational institution to impose a hijab
ban with immediate effect. However, it was interpreted by politicians, bureaucrats as well as the media
as not only a judicial legitimation of the hijab ban but as a judicial mandate to immediately implement
the hijab ban across the state. The Minister of Education, BC Nagesh, issued statements to the media
that entry into examination halls will be barred to all students wearing the hijab. 3

Educational institutions across Karnataka, prohibited the hijab. Educational authorities who had the
constitutional responsibility to ensure the right to education, implemented the ban during the time of
the end of year exams.

Sections of the electronic media also went beyond their mandate and pressurized school and college
authorities to ‘implement the High Court order’.

Page 2 of 8
Key Events and Dates

Date Event(s)
31 December 2021 Govt PU College, Udupi imposed a sudden ban on hijab inside classrooms
Kundapur GOVT PU College students attended classes wearing saffron
05 January 2022
shawls as a means of protest against hijab
Karntaka Govt sets up an expert committee to resolve the issue at Govt PU
26 January 2022
College in Udupi, Govt statement to maintain status quo
Students file a Writ petition in the Karnatak High Court challenging the
31 January 2002
decision of College Dev Committee
The President of the College Dev Committee passed a resolution to prohibit
31 January 2002
hijab in the classroom
02 February 2022 Hijab wearing students denied entry into Govt Junior PU college, Kundapur
Hijab wearing students denied entry into Bhandardkar college of arts and
04 February 2022
science, Udupi
DMK MP Senthil Kumar raised Karnataka Hijab Row in Parliament, urged
04 February 2022
the central Govt to take action
Government Order issued allowing only uniforms prescribed by CDC of
05 February 2022
each educational institution
BJP MLA Yatnal said that students wanting to wear hijab should go to
05 February 2022
pakistan
Students protest in IDSG college, chickmagalur in blue shawls and 'Jai bhim'
07 February 2022
sloganeering
Protests erupted in MGM college Udupi with students wearing saffron
08 February 2022
shawls, chanting of 'jai shree ram', similar protests in shimoga and Bagalkot
08 February 2022 Karnataka HC began hearing in the petition challenging hijab restriction
Single bench of Karnataka HC referred case to the Chief Justice of
09 February 2022
Karnataka High Court for the matter to be heard by a large bench
Copies of college admission ledger with address, phone, income data of
09 February 2022
protesting students leaked
Karnataka HC passed an interim order restraining all students from wearing
10 February 2022
saffrons, shawls, Hijab
Complaint filed against MLA Raghupati Bhat, Yashpal Suvarna and Rudre
11 February 2022
Gowda by parents for data breach and leakage
12 February 2022 MLA Raghupati Bhat sought an NIA probe into hijab issue
FIR filed against students of a private college in tumkur fir violating
18 February 2022
prohibitory orders
Bajrang Dal member Harsha Jingade was murdered in Shimoga, incidents of
20 February 2022
hindu right wing vandalizing vehicles belonging to muslim houses
Bajarang Dal Member Pooja Veerashetty gave an open call for genocide
25 February 2022
saying those who wear hijab, their heads will be chopped off
25 February 2022 Karnataka HC reserves rhe case for judgement after 11 days of hearing

Page 3 of 8
 15 March 2022 Karnataka HC passed a final order upholding Govt order dated 05/02/22

17 March 2022 Bundh observed in many parts of Karnataka

16 May 2022 Mangalore university resolved to impose a ban on hijab in campuses

The Supreme court agreed to hear petitions filed challenging the Karnataka
13 July 2022
HC verdict
05 September 2022 SC hearings began

22 September 2002 SC bench reserved the verdict

The Supreme court delivered a split verdict on Hijab ban, matter referred to
13 October 2022
CJI

Violation of Constitutional and Fundamental Rights of Students

This section provides an updateof how the action of the state, violated the Constitutional rights of the
students:

• Right to Education without discrimination: The Muslim women students were denied
their right to education, by being forced to stay out of the classrooms.
• Right to Dignity: Students recounted how the experience of being forced to choose between
wearing the hijab and continuing their education was an assault on their dignity.
• Right to Privacy: Right to a personal choice was seized from Muslim women students.
Students also shared how they were placed under the hostile gaze of the media which
displayed many of their names and images on television and the internet.
• Right to Freedom of Expression: Testimonies of students who shared how the wearing the
hijab was a way for them to exercise their freedom of expression.
• Right to Non-Discrimination: Muslim women students shared how they were segregated
from other students, and subjected to discriminatory treatment merely because of their
identity.
• Freedom from Arbitrary State Action: The arbitrariness of the ban imposed with immediate
effect, has had far-reaching consequences on the academic lives, social relations and mental
health of Muslim women students.

Page 4 of 8
Role of Different Institutions and Instrumentalities

Role of the Educational Bureaucracy

Interviews with district administration officials revealed that they neither received written orders from
higher authorities nor gave instructions to college administrators in writing, even as they proceeded to
deprive Muslim students of the right to education

Mr B.C. Nagesh, Minister of Education played an invidious role in furthering the victimization
experienced by Muslim students. It is pertinent to note that the deliberate misinterpretation of
Karnataka High Court’s interim order, the final verdict and various Government Orders led to a
series of violations of the rights of Muslim students. This misinterpretation was led by Mr. BC
Nagesh, the person responsible for ensuring that the right to education of all students is protected
and realised. The Education Minister instead of addressing the reasons for such an educational
emergency, only added one more basis for exclusion by thoughtlessly implementing a de fact hijab
ban policy

In addition, Acting on instructions given orally by the DC’s office, principals and administrators of
PU and degree college students interviewed by the PUCL-K team indicated that they were strictly told
to impose an unconditional ban on the hijab with immediate effect. Be it a private college, a
government college, a PU college or a degree college – principals of all colleges were told to deny
entry to hijab-wearing Muslim students. The College Development committees (CDCs) were given a
sudden and disproportionate amount power relative to their dormant existence hitherto. This is
arguably an excessive delegation of power that has affected the fundamental rights of expression of
students.

Role of the Police

The police created a hostile environment of hate targeted against Muslim students. By going beyond
their mandate and entering college campuses, forcing students to remove the hijab, taking pictures
and videos of hijab-wearing Muslim women students and displaying a callous indifference to the
harassment faced by the students, the police failed to fulfil their constitutional responsibility.

The police did not play an ‘impartial’ role, ‘respectful of human rights’, in the events both just before
and after the Karnataka High Court delivered its verdict. The period prior to the High Court interim
order was rife with a number of vigilante actions which harassed, threatened and intimidated Muslim
girl students (as shared by them in their testimonies).72 Social media platforms were flooded with
hateful and stereotypical posts about hijab- wearing Muslim women students who were protesting for
their right to continue their education

Large-scale deployment of police personnel in the colleges and the manner in which they conducted
themselves during the events connected with the hijab ban made the experience of going to college an
unnerving experience for Muslim women students

Role of Hindutva Organizations in Amplifying Hatred

The role of Hindutva organisations in inciting hatred has been deduced by testimonies and
conversations with students and activists. Even before the interim order was issued by the Karnataka
High Court, the Sangh Parivar began campaigning against the right to wear hijabs.96 On January 21,
Hindu Jagarana Vedike leaders warned of a saffron shawl campaign.97 Within one week of the
interim order issued by the High Court, three colleges in Karnataka witnessed protests against hijab-
wearing Muslim students

Page 5 of 8
Conversations with Muslim students made it clear that social media platforms helped Hindutva
groups amplify hatred against Muslim students. In all five districts, students reported that hate
campaigns were popular and effective on social media, in spreading lies about Muslims, issue
provocative statements about the threat to Hinduism, and call for staging protests wearing saffron
shawls

The core point which this chapter seeks to make is that the reason behind the hijab ban in the Indian
context has to do with gendered Islamophobia. Gendered Islamophobia is linked to a vision which
seeks to obliterate the Constitutional ideals founded as they are on an equal respect for difference and
diversity.

Role of Kannada TV Media – Weaponising the Camera

The Kannada TV media coverage, constantly pushed a dominant narrative that stereotyped Muslim
students and grossly violated their Constitutional rights as well as the media’s own code of ethics. In
entering educational institutions and imposing a hijab ban the media, at points, acted as a vigilante
organisation.

The role of Kannada TV media during the hijab controversy (up until the interim order) has been
three-fold:

1. Fuelling widespread anti-hijab sentiment;

2. Framing the issue as hijab vs sindhoor (and implicitly anti-Hindu);
3. Undertaking vigilante action that either coerced school, college and state authorities into forcing
students to remove their hijab or directly forcing the students to remove their hijab.

The Politics of Banning the Hijab

An important aspect of Islamophobia is gendered Islamophobia. The effect of Islamophobia is
especially felt by Muslim women due to the hijab being a visible symbol of their religious faith.
Studies reveal that women in hijab rather than Muslim men are the predominant target of anti-Muslim
attacks, not only because they are more easily identifiable as Muslims, but because they are seen to
represent a threat to the moral order that the attackers are seeking to defend.

The main reason behind the hijab ban in the Indian context has to do with a discomfort with Muslim
identities in the public sphere and a desire to erase signs of being Muslim and produce a homogenous
Indian nation premised on Hindutva. As such Islamophobia and in particular gendered Islamophobia
as practiced by the Hindu right in India is linked to a vision which seeks to obliterate the
Constitutional vision founded as it is on an equal respect for difference and diversity

The growing dominance of the Hindutva movement in public culture, especially in the social media,
has been marked by several instances of a public call for violence against Muslim women, going
unchecked by any law. A recent example is an app called ‘Clubhouse’ where individuals have not only
called for sexual violence against Muslim women, but have included graphic details of such acts.
Again, since July 2021, apps such as Sulli Deals and Bulli Bai have been made by Hindutva
sympathizers to ‘auction’ prominent and vocal Muslim women. This forms the context for the recent
systematic campaign against the hijab.

Page 6 of 8
Role of Civil Society
This section presents the initiatives and efforts of different civil society groups to express solidarity
and assert the values of secularism, communal harmony and peace. Civil society organisations also
reached out to students impacted by the order and judgements and assisted them in negotiating with
college authorities and district administration

In Bangalore, hundreds of women and LGBTQ+ community members gathered to protest against
the violations of the rights of Muslim women students

In an order dated March 3, 2022, the Karnataka High Court banned protests across the city and
designated only the Freedom Park for people to assemble and protest.

Civil society organisations objecting to the actions of the government were denied their right to
assemble, in several instances across Karnataka. In fact, even a candlelight vigil organised by ‘Bahutva
Karnataka’, a citizens’ forum for plurality and communal harmony, was cancelled because the police
withdrew permission for the protest.

The All India Students Association (AISA) also took part in the protest by distributing copies of the
High Court Judgement. The police detained two student-activists for almost 9 hours and assaulted
them.

In Udupi, a large coalition of progressive civil society organisations organised a rally and a state-level
convention, ‘Samarasyada Nadige, Sahabalve Samavesha’ issuing a call for interfaith harmony. This
rally saw the participation of almost 8,000 people from all walks of life, and proclamation of messages
of peace, harmony, and justice from various religious leaders, social activists, and concerned citizens.

Legal Analysis Of High Court and Supreme Court Judgements

This section analyses the Karnataka High Court judgment, in Resham v the State of Karnataka as well
as the Supreme Court’s split verdict in Aishat Shifa vs. State of Karnataka and reiterates the hope in
Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia’s judgement, that discipline cannot be at the cost of dignity and autonomy
is prescient as the intelligence of a future day

The judgement was extensively criticised by constitutional law scholars as being based on an incorrect
appreciation of the principles of constitutional law – the main critiques are as follows

1) An incorrect focus on Hijab as Essential Religious Practice(ERP)

2) Failure to focus on principle of non-discrmination as per Article 15 of the Indian Constitution
3) Failure to address the right to privacy and freedom of expression
4) Failure to apply principle of reasonable accommodation
5) Failure to protect the fundamental right to education to be guaranteed by the state without
discrimination

Page 7 of 8
Conclusion
The Report makes a number of detailed recommendations to the following authorities / institutions

1) State Government
2) Department of Collegiate Education and Public Instruction
3) Department of Women and Child Development
4) District Administration
5) Karnataka State Police
6) Media, College Administrations and State Level legal Authorities

Page 8 of 8