Şahin (born in Istanbul in 1973) came from a traditional family of practising Muslims and considered it her religious duty to wear the Islamic headscarf.
In March Şahin was denied access to a written examination on one of the subjects she was studying because she was wearing the Islamic headscarf.
[2] Talvikki Hoopes argues that the decision to uphold the Turkish university’s law banning Leyla Sahin from wearing a headscarf is informed by the ECHR’s narrow interpretation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
[3] The first paragraph provides that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion…to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”[4] The second paragraph subjects the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs to ‘limitations prescribed by law and necessary in a democratic society for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.’[4] The ECHR understood ‘prescription by law’ to mean law in the substantive sense and therefore inclusive of both written statutes, measures and “regulatory measures taken by professional regulatory bodies”[5] with delegated powers from the government.
Hence, the circular detailing the ban on headscarves provided to students by the Vice-Chancellor of Istanbul University, was determined to be ‘prescribed law’, the ECHR having referenced a 1989 Turkish Constitutional judgment that mentioned headscarves in higher education as “contrary to the principles of secularism…and first and foremost contrary to the Constitution.”[6] The ECHR then addressed whether the law was ‘necessary in a democratic society’ and determined that the “choice of the extent and form” of religious regulations should remain primarily within the powers of the state.