Opinion Analysis by Tala Karkanawi, Staff Writer

February 21st, 2021

When it comes to women present in the judiciary system in Lebanon, the number has vastly increased, reaching an adequate level, with hope that someday, the majority of the judges will be women. However, when talking about Hijabi women and their place in the judiciary system, it is not about quantity, but rather being able to be a part of it to begin with. There are plenty of enduring barriers and blockades to women’s entry and career progression in the judiciary system that remain unaddressed and unsolved until this day. Women are still excluded from multiple positions that are regarded as “sensitive” in the judicial system as well as senior positions, revolving around fields such as military and criminal justice. In addition, female judges are still unable to assent to religious courts that have jurisdiction over their personal and social issues, which play a significant and essential role in their lives. 

The significance of these laws does not stop here though. Muslim women who chose to wear the Hijab are not permitted to be a member within the judiciary system and will not be accepted as judges in Lebanon. The issue is deemed highly controversial, yet not in the sense of whether the judiciary system should accept women wearing the hijab, but because Lebanon’s government and politics are built on religion, which is an issue that has led to major separations among citizens for more than 30 years. 

It is essential to note that banning women wearing the hijab from becoming judges is a custom law, not one that is written or accredited for within the constitution. Customary law is recognised under a pattern of social behaviours that are deemed to be acceptable by the society under the defence of “This is something that has always been done which allows it to be accepted by the law.” Since this is part of the Lebanese customary law, it makes it harder for us to understand the depth of the law itself, knowing that there is no specific wording for the law. 

The idea of allowing women who wear the hijab positions in the judiciary system, especially the role of being a judge, plays a role in undermining how a civil and a secular country looks like. Manar Zyaatar, a Lebanese lawyer and an activist mentioned how important it is to secure the freedom and the right of allowing a person to freely express their religious thoughts and personas, however it is also important to maintain a certain attire in the country that does not show any biases towards a certain deity law, in this case, the Sharia Law. However, when it comes to a country like Lebanon, a country that is based on sectarianism, it is not logical to maintain a defence such as this. 

This case was raised by the campaign “The Hijab in the Judiciary” that was led by Mrs. Mirna Taha, a Lebanese lawyer and activist who confirmed that veiled women who apply for the role of judges are rejected. She said that this happens because the judiciary system believes that her being a veiled woman might lean towards the Sharia law, disregarding the civil state and the Lebanese law. This raised multiple disputes and controversies by the people since this defence shows how sexist the judiciary and the political system is. 

Customary law has been greatly abused by the Lebanese government on multiple occasions, however their defence regarding this situation is to eliminate any bias or any religious, political or social affiliations that could supposedly result in an unfair trial and sentence. It is very suspicious that this type of defence is being used when the country is filled with sectarianism, nepotism, and plenty of corrupted officials that are ruling a country that has been burned down time and time again. 

If the Lebanese constitution was to be applied as originally arranged, the country would have witnessed serious reforms. Article 7 of the Lebanese constitution states that “All Lebanese shall be equal before the law. They shall equally enjoy civil and political rights and shall equally be bound by public obligations and duties without any distinction.”. Additionally, Article 9 states that “There shall be absolute freedom of conscience. The state, in rendering homage to the God Almighty shall respect all religions and creeds, and guarantee, under its protection the free exercise of all religious rites provided that the public order is not disturbed. It all also guarantee that the personal status and religious interests of the population, to whatever religious sect they belong, shall be respected.”

The constitution protects the rights of the Lebanese citizen under the law as well as the freedom of religious thoughts and practices.  How does the judiciary system and the government expect to disregard any religious attire whatsoever when the country is run and is segregated by religion? When appointed, the judge takes multiple tests that include skills such as capability, ethics and competence. So, to say that a woman who wears the hijab might be biased yet disregard the men who follow religious sects but don’t necessarily wear the attire for it aren’t, showcases perfectly the gender biases that are still prevailing in the country. 

This issue is extremely significant because it is not discussed that often. The laws and regulations are not given to us clearly to understand and there is a significant lack of sources to cover this topic greatly, especially since this is an aspect of customary law which makes it harder for us to clearly understand this topic in depth. 

Judging women’s abilities and potentials within the judiciary system based on their attire undermines all women who have different religious, political and social affiliations. What is surprising is that the judiciary allows women wearing the Hijab to apply for the tests needed to become a judge yet declines them when interviews with the Supreme Judicial Council are to take place.  

To the judiciary system in Lebanon, on behalf of all women who couldn’t achieve their dreams due to the customs, their Hijab is not against the law and shouldn’t even be a mere factor to take into consideration. Their attire shouldn’t determine their intelligence and capability of attaining any political, governmental or judicial role in the country.