Berlin: Headscarves soon also for female police officers and judges?

A sociopolitical battle over the neutrality law is raging again in Berlin. Headscarves should also be permitted in the police and judiciary. The outcome is uncertain.

Headscarves in classrooms are commonplace dpa

In Berlin, Muslim teachers have been allowed to wear headscarves for two years. According to plans by the Green Party, this should also apply to female police officers and judges. But the state government, which is comprised of the Christian Democratic Union (CDU/CSU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD), has so far refused to comply. Now, there's a new attempt to challenge the controversial Berlin Neutrality Act. It's a dispute over identity politics.

Berlin's Neutrality Act originally prohibited teachers, police officers, and judicial officials from openly wearing religious symbols while on duty. Islamic associations and their political allies viewed this as discrimination. They sued and were successful. In 2015, the Federal Constitutional Court issued a landmark ruling: a general headscarf ban was incompatible with the Basic Law and disproportionately restricted fundamental rights. Since then, it has been clear: the Berlin law is unconstitutional.

Headscarf dispute: Berlin law contradicts the constitution

Lawsuits were filed repeatedly, and the state of Berlin was repeatedly forced to pay damages because trainee teachers were not hired because of their headscarves. In 2018, a woman received more than 5,000 euros in compensation under the General Equal Treatment Act following a ruling by the Federal Labor Court.

In 2023, the Senate Education Administration, then led by the SPD, announced in a circular to all school principals that it would be abandoning its previous literal application of the law. "The wearing of religiously influenced clothing and symbols" could only be prohibited if there was a "concrete threat to school peace or state neutrality," it stated.

This quickly led to the decision that teachers are allowed to wear headscarves, because the question of whether "school peace" is at risk or not was and still is difficult to answer in everyday life. The ban on wearing headscarves in the police and judicial systems remained unaffected. Incidentally, the situation is different in Great Britain. In Scotland, for example, female police officers have long been allowed to wear headscarves .

The Berlin school circular interrupted the coalition negotiations between the CDU and SPD. Kai Wegner, who later became mayor, made no secret of the fact that "we find the timing of the letter unfortunate. It is anything but helpful."

In the coalition agreement, it was finally agreed that the CDU and SPD would adapt the Neutrality Act “in a legally sound manner to the current case law of the Federal Constitutional Court and the Federal Labor Court.”

Headscarf dispute: Only a few female teachers in Berlin wear headscarves

Nothing has happened since then, and the unrest in Berlin's schools has largely subsided. Some teachers in Berlin wear headscarves, but most do not. Even when clashes in Berlin's schools increased after the Hamas attack on Israel in October 2023, the issue was not about teachers wearing religious symbols.

This calm is now over. The Berlin Greens have long wanted to repeal the entire law. What is argued for schools applies "equally to the judiciary and the police," as stated in an earlier motion. Now they are making a new attempt. The goal: Female police officers, judicial officials, and judges should also be allowed to wear headscarves while on duty.

Integration politician Tuba Bozkurt spoke in the Tagesspiegel newspaper of a "de facto professional ban" for people wearing headscarves who want to work in the police or judiciary. The neutrality law hinders "the access of women who have chosen to wear a headscarf to public service jobs – and in some cases makes them impossible." She also cited the shortage of skilled workers and labor.

The Green Party's motion also states that maintaining the law contradicts "a liberal and diverse society." This almost sounds like a battle cry for anti-Muslim racism, which must be overcome.

Criticism of the Green Party's initiative comes not only from politics, but also from academia. The neutrality of state bodies is paramount, and the plans to abolish it demonstrate an "unworldly understanding of social reality," says Frankfurt-based Islamic scholar and ethnologist Susanne Schröter, particularly in Berlin. "Nowhere is the neutrality law more important."

Now, as is well known, the Berlin Greens have found themselves in opposition after the 2023 parliamentary elections. The success of their bill is therefore virtually impossible.

However, it could potentially cause turmoil within the SPD, with its opinionated migrant faction and its penchant for integration policy. Some even speculated that the Greens might have been deployed for this initiative by an interested SPD party.

Officially, the SPD is not pursuing the abolition of the neutrality law. The way it is handled in schools satisfies the courts' requirements, they say. Neutrality must be maintained at all costs in the police and judiciary.

Neutrality law: Is the headscarf dispute dividing the Berlin SPD?

This is also the argument of SPD interior policy expert Martin Matz. Beyond the debate in schools, he is thinking about the situation in politics and the judiciary. "I very much hope for a sensitive approach to this," Matz said in an interview with the Berliner Zeitung.

A statement from the Senate Interior Administration, also led by the SPD, sounds very similar. From their perspective, it is clear "that maintaining ideological neutrality is of considerable importance in the police service." Accordingly, they do not consider any changes appropriate.

Neutrality law: Clear stance from the Berlin CDU

But the rumblings within the SPD are unlikely to subside anytime soon. And so, there are quite a few Social Democrats who are secretly thanking CDU politician Burkard Dregger. When asked by the daily newspaper Welt whether the neutrality law should be abolished, the domestic politician, known for his outspokenness, told the German daily newspaper "Welt": "It is fundamentally wrong to consider such a thing."