TEDH: Prohibición del uso de velo islámico a mujer que enseñaba en escuela no constituye un acto discriminatorio porque la medida impuesta buscaba como objetivo legítimo garantizar la neutralidad del sistema estatal de enseñanza de educación primaria [Dahlab vs. Suiza, f. j. 2]

Fundamento destacado: 2. […] El Tribunal observa en el presente caso que la medida por la que se prohibió a la demandante, en el marco exclusivo de sus funciones profesionales, llevar el velo islámico no estaba dirigida contra ella en su condición de mujer, sino que perseguía el objetivo legítimo de garantizar la neutralidad del sistema de enseñanza primaria estatal. Una medida de ese tipo también podría aplicarse a un hombre que, en circunstancias similares, llevara prendas que lo identificaran claramente como miembro de una confesión diferente.

Por consiguiente, el Tribunal concluye que en el presente caso no hubo discriminación por motivos de sexo.

[Traducción de LP]

[…] The Court notes in the instant case that the measure by which the applicant was prohibited, purely in the context of her professional duties, from wearing an Islamic headscarf was not directed at her as a member of the female sex but pursued the legitimate aim of ensuring the neutrality of the State primary-education system. Such a measure could also be applied to a man who, in similar circumstances, wore clothing that clearly identified him as a member of a different faith.

The Court accordingly concludes that there was no discrimination on the ground of sex in the instant case.

[Idioma original]


DAHLAB v. SWITZERLAND DECISION

[TRANSLATION]

THE FACTS

The applicant [Lucia Dahlab], a Swiss national born in 1965, is a primary-school teacher and lives in Geneva (Switzerland). She was represented before the Court by Mr M. Lironi and Mr C. Aellen, both of the Geneva Bar.

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

The applicant was appointed as a primary-school teacher by the Geneva cantonal government (Conseil d’Etat) on 1 September 1990, having taught at Châtelaine Primary School in the Canton of Geneva since the 1989-90 school year.

After a period of spiritual soul-searching, the applicant abandoned the Catholic faith and converted to Islam in March 1991. On 19 October 1991 she married an Algerian national, Mr A. Dahlab. The marriage has produced three children, born in 1992, 1994 and 1998.

The applicant began wearing an Islamic headscarf in class towards the end of the 1990-91 school year, her intention being to observe a precept laid down in the Koran whereby women were enjoined to draw their veils over themselves in the presence of men and male adolescents.

The applicant went on maternity leave from 21 August 1992 to 7 January 1993 and from 12 January 1994 to 1 June 1994.

In May 1995 the schools inspector for the Vernier district informed the Canton of Geneva Directorate General for Primary Education that the applicant regularly wore an Islamic headscarf at school; the inspector added that she had never had any comments from parents on the subject.

On 27 June 1996 a meeting was held between the applicant, the Director General of Primary Education (“the Director General”) and the head of the teaching-personnel department concerning the fact that the applicant wore a headscarf. In a letter of 11 July 1996 the Director General confirmed the position she had adopted at the meeting, requesting the applicant to stop wearing the headscarf while carrying out her professional duties, as such conduct was incompatible with section 6 of the Public Education Act.

In a letter of 21 August 1996 the applicant requested the Director General to issue a formal ruling on the matter.

On 23 August 1996 the Directorate General for Primary Education confirmed its previous decision. It prohibited the applicant from wearing a headscarf in the performance of her professional duties on the grounds that such a practice contravened section 6 of the Public Education Act and constituted “an obvious means of identification imposed by a teacher on her pupils, especially in a public, secular education system”.

On 26 August 1996 the applicant appealed against that decision to the Geneva cantonal government.

The cantonal government dismissed the appeal in an order of 16 October 1996, on the following grounds:

“Teachers must … endorse both the objectives of the State school system and the obligations incumbent on the education authorities, including the strict obligation of denominational neutrality…

The clothing in issue … represents …, regardless even of the appellant’s intention, a means of conveying a religious message in a manner which in her case is sufficiently strong … to extend beyond her purely personal sphere and to have repercussions for the institution she represents, namely the State school system.”

[Continúa…]

Descargue la resolución aquí

Comentarios: