Template:AOW119: Difference between revisions

From SikhiWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{aowh|[[The Right to wear the 5Ks]]}}
{{aowh|[[The right to wear the 5Ks]]}}


[[Image:Banglepa300.jpg|thumb|200px|right|{{cs|'''Sarika Watkins-Singh'''<br>''photo courtesy bbc''}}]]
[[Image:Banglepa300.jpg|thumb|150px|right|{{cs|'''[[Sarika Watkins-Singh]]'''<br>''photo courtesy bbc''}}]]


Yesterday, February 5, 2008, a UK judge Sir Michael Harrison in Court 18 at the Royal Court of Justice in London decided not to allow a [[Sikh]] girl, Sarika Watkins-Singh to wear her [[Kara]], one of the [[five articles of faith]] to school before the case is heard in full at a hearing in several months time.
On February 5, 2008, at a preliminary hearing, a UK judge Sir Michael Harrison in Court 18 at the {{w|Royal Court of Justice}} in London decided not to allow a [[Sikh]] girl, [[Sarika Watkins-Singh]] to wear her [[Kara]] to school.


The deputy High Court judge decided that the 14-year-old Sikh girl cannot wear her [[kara]] to school pending a full legal battle over her cultural and religious rights. This is surprising as in 1983 the House of Lords, the supreme court in the UK decided that a school had violated the rights of a student, Gurinder Singh Mandla when he was not allowed to enter the school because of his [[turban]] which he used to cover his [[kesh]] (uncut hair), which is one of the [[5ks]] or [[Articles of faith]]. (see the full judgement [[Mandla v Dowell Lee]]).
The [[Kara]] is one of the [[five articles of faith]] which is worn by all practising [[Sikh]]s. The decision was made before the case was heard at a full hearing several months later.  


In what appears an unbelievable statement, the judge ruled: ''"Whilst I accept there will be detriment to the claimant (Sarika) if she is not able to wear the [[Kara]] in the interim, it does not seem to me that is anything like as significant as the detriment to the school if she were allowed to wear it."'' This surprised a lot of [[Sikhs]] as it appears to encourage other organisations to freely discriminate and break the law as the ''"detriment to the claimant"'' may be less significant than to the opposite party. {{aowf|The Right to wear the 5Ks}}
Fortunately, when the case was heard at a full trial by Mr Justice Silber, over 3 days from '''[[17 June]]''', 2008, he sided with the [[Sikh]] girl.
 
The deputy High Court judge decision at the first hearing was surprising as in 1983 the {{w|House of Lords}}, the supreme court in the UK decided that a school had violated the rights of a student, [[Gurinder Singh Mandla]] when he was not allowed to join the school because of his [[turban]] which he used to cover his [[kesh]] (uncut hair); one of the [[5ks]] or [[Articles of faith]]. (see the full judgement [[Mandla v Dowell Lee]]).
 
In what appears an unbelievable statement, the deputy judge ruled: ''"Whilst I accept there will be detriment to the claimant (Sarika) if she is not able to wear the [[Kara]] in the interim, it does not seem to me that is anything like as significant as the detriment to the school if she were allowed to wear it."''  
 
This surprised a lot of [[Sikhs]] as it appears to encourage other organisations to freely discriminate and break the law as the ''"detriment to the claimant"'' may be less significant than to the opposite party. {{aowf|The right to wear the 5Ks}}

Latest revision as of 18:30, 16 June 2011

Sarika Watkins-Singh
photo courtesy bbc

On February 5, 2008, at a preliminary hearing, a UK judge Sir Michael Harrison in Court 18 at the Royal Court of Justice in London decided not to allow a Sikh girl, Sarika Watkins-Singh to wear her Kara to school.

The Kara is one of the five articles of faith which is worn by all practising Sikhs. The decision was made before the case was heard at a full hearing several months later.

Fortunately, when the case was heard at a full trial by Mr Justice Silber, over 3 days from 17 June, 2008, he sided with the Sikh girl.

The deputy High Court judge decision at the first hearing was surprising as in 1983 the House of Lords, the supreme court in the UK decided that a school had violated the rights of a student, Gurinder Singh Mandla when he was not allowed to join the school because of his turban which he used to cover his kesh (uncut hair); one of the 5ks or Articles of faith. (see the full judgement Mandla v Dowell Lee).

In what appears an unbelievable statement, the deputy judge ruled: "Whilst I accept there will be detriment to the claimant (Sarika) if she is not able to wear the Kara in the interim, it does not seem to me that is anything like as significant as the detriment to the school if she were allowed to wear it."

This surprised a lot of Sikhs as it appears to encourage other organisations to freely discriminate and break the law as the "detriment to the claimant" may be less significant than to the opposite party. .....More