The perversity of the Ontario ruling on niqab in court

Submitted by Soloview (Canada), Oct 19, 2010 at 23:34

The Appelate Court did not actually allow the burqa but ordered judges to conduct an inquiry as to whether the witness sincerely believes the removal of the face cloth would violate her religious beliefs in the view of the "competing interests" of the defense. But this his an idiotic ruling. The common law knows no "competing interests" to the right of the accused to face his accuser in the court of law. Besides, how would this "sincerety of belief" be established ? It transparently puts the onus on the defence, as notoriously "sincerity cannot be proven, only disproved".

Here is the refererence: http://www.globaltoronto.com/Wearing+muslim+veil+decided+case+case+basis+Ontario+court/3664172/story.html

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".