 |
|
 |
| Collectif:
“A School for All” |
|
|
|
The
association “Collectif: A school for all, against the laws
of exclusion” has been created in many French cities, in
reaction to the law forbidding the wearing of visible
“religious signs” in public schools.
Collectif
is a collective of associations and individuals united by
their attachment to secularization and struggle to denounce
the discriminatory nature of the law forbidding the wearing of
religious signs in schools.
Collectif
supports all students regardless of their choice: whether it
is to wear the scarf or the turban, to find a compromise, or
to take the head covering off. Furthermore, Collectif calls on
all students to support fellow students who are threatened by
the law of exclusion.
These
associations are independent and self-governing in their
internal affairs, their choice of the various legal procedures
they take, and their political moves. Their work is based on
the general principles and objectives outlined in the
following charter:
|
|
In
the name of the universal principles of liberty and equality,
we refute the law forbidding “the wearing of visible
religious signs in schools.”
|
|
|
First
Principle: Equality of treatment and the rejection of
discrimination on the basis of religion
|
|
|
|
The
law forbidding the wearing of visible religious signs is
considered a law of exclusion, with the purpose of excluding
students wearing hijab (scarf). Even if it was passed in the
guise of a general law to be applied to all religions, no one
is fooled by this.
It
has been about the Islamic hijab, and nothing else, since the
discussion on “secularization” has been re-opened.
|
|
-
It
is obvious that only the Islamic hijab was meant in the
speech in which the president declared his wish for such
a law.
-
It
is the Islamic hijab and nothing else that is meant in
ministerial circulars when they suggest the addition of
new articles to the law in order to prohibit head
coverings in the name of “secularism” but rather in
the name of “correcting” the school uniform.
|
|
We
refuse this hypocrisy and we oppose this discriminatory law,
which favors communities to withdraw and keeps alive all
kinds of superficial suspicions— between France and the
immigrants, the republic and Islam, and between the various
faiths.
In
the name of equality of treatment, we affirm that the hijab
has to be accepted the same way as the cross, the yarmulke,
the Sikh’s turban, and other signs (religious, political,
commercial) or way of dress are accepted. We will defend all
students threatened with exclusion solely on the basis of
their dress.
|
|
|
|
Second
Principle: Equal treatment for men and women and faithfulness
to the feminist struggle
|
|
This
law was presented as a feminist measure aiming at promoting
equality between men and women and, therefore, opposing
symbols of oppression. If we are against forcing women to
wear the hijab against their will, we should also be against
forcing other women to take it off.
|
|
|
|
Third
Principle: The right to education for all |
|
We
are aware that the hijab is at the heart of the law and the
public debate, and we unhesitatingly stand in solidarity
with the students who wish to keep the hijab on in public
school. However, we do not lend our support to the hijab as
a symbol, an idea, or a social fact; it is rather the
individual unalienable rights that we defend. As its name
indicates, the association “A School for All” is founded
upon the principle of unalienable rights of education for
all—a public, secular, and free education.
|
|
|
|
Forth
Principle: Secularism guarantees freedom of conscience
|
|
The
law forbidding the wearing of visible religious signs was
presented as a “necessary reminder” of secular
principles that had been “forgotten” in the past few
years. However, secularity as defined by the laws of 1881,
1882, 1886, and 1905 guarantees freedom of conscience and
the emancipation of men and women apart from religious
dogma.
This
obligation concerns the premises, the educational programs,
and the teachers, but not the students. To the students
apply regulations concerning assiduousness in their work and
respect for others. It is not lawful to multiply the demands
on these young people who come to school to learn and be
formed.
|
|
|
|
Fifth
Principle: Pedagogy and the rejection of increasing repression
|
|
We
refuse the extension of security and punitive logic to all
spheres of social life, and particularly to the educational
sphere. The law forbidding hijab is, in fact, a new stage in
an ongoing process: it comes after making “intrusion in an
educational institution” punishable by law in 1998 as well
as creating the offense of “insulting teaching
personnel” (punishable by imprisonment) in 2003.
Furthermore, projects aiming at punishing absenteeism are
regularly revived.
|
|
|
|
Sixth
Principle: Social justice
|
|
We
do not accept that young Muslim girls who wear the hijab
become the scapegoats that we pursue in order to forget the
logic of exclusion and dominance that permeates our society:
liberalization of the economy, mass unemployment, diminution
of salaries, extension of social control and security
measures, continuing racial discrimination, and social
inequality between men and women.
|
|
Objectives
and Actions
|
|
|
|
The ultimate
objective: The abrogation of the law
|
|
It
follows from the enumerated principles that our ultimate
objective is the abrogation of the law forbidding the
wearing of “visible religious signs.”
|
|
|
|
Immediate
objective: The struggle against exclusion |
|
If
our principles lead us to demand no less than the abrogation
of this completely illegitimate law, our ethic of
responsibility, on the other hand, forces us to take into
consideration the present situation and the point of view of
the students the law aims at, especially those students who
wear the hijab and are the principal targets of the
legislators and those who argue in favor of the prohibition
law.
The
association A School for All is preparing for the opening of
the school year 2004 and has made its principle objective
the support of students wearing hijab and other prospective
victims of the law, and to manage a campaign to raise public
awareness to prevent their exclusion.
|
|
|
|
Our position
with regard to resorting to private schools and correspondence
courses
|
|
Collectif
fully rejects the hypocrisy of referring students to private
schools or forcing them to take courses by correspondence
under the pretext of guaranteeing their right to education.
“A
School for All” is a true school—public, secular,
coeducational, and free—with its own teachers, classrooms,
classmates, and time for recreation. The private schools and
correspondence courses will only make sense if they are
chosen by the students themselves and not imposed by a
public school that excludes them.
Collectif
can be found in
Grenoble
,
Lille
,
Lyon
, Marseille,
Montpellier
, Nîmes,
Paris
,
Rennes
,
Rouen
, Saint Etienne,
Strasbourg
,
Toulouse
,
Tours
. To get in touch with these associations, write to cndetim@reseau-ipam.org.
To
start a new association you have to adhere to the present
charter and get in touch with the national coordinators
using the e-mail address above.
|
|
|
