French politicians accused of Islamophobia amid row over schoolgirls’ parliament visit

1 / 2
Yael Braun-Pivet, the French National Assembly's president, was quick to criticize the girls wearing their hijabs inside the parliament. (AFP/File)
2 / 2
The schoolgirls were on a visit to the French National Assembly when they were photographed sat in the public gallery. (AFP/File)
Short Url
Updated 06 November 2025
Follow

French politicians accused of Islamophobia amid row over schoolgirls’ parliament visit

  • Parliament speaker and other MPs condemn wearing of hijab inside National Assembly’s public gallery
  • Opponents say the girls did not breach France’s strict laws on religious symbols at school

LONDON: The latest row surrounding France’s ban on religious symbols at school has erupted after a group of Muslim schoolgirls visited the National Assembly wearing hijabs.

Yael Braun-Pivet, the assembly’s speaker and a member of President Emmanuel Macron’s centrist Renaissance Party, said the girls’ visit to the public gallery was “unacceptable” under the country’s secularist laws.

But other MPs hit back, accusing Braun-Pivet of Islamophobia and adopting the far-right strategy of using bans on religious clothing to target Muslims.

Students in public schools are banned from wearing religious symbols, including Christian crosses, Muslim headscarves, Jewish kippas and Sikh turbans. Civil servants face similar restrictions.

In 2023, France also banned students from wearing the abaya in public schools.

Images of the girls’ visit to the lower house of the French parliament on Wednesday were shared on social media and quickly went viral.

Braun-Pivet wrote on X: “At the very heart of the National Assembly, where the 2004 law on secularism in schools was voted, it seems to me unacceptable that young children can wear conspicuous religious symbols in the galleries … This is a question of the coherence of the republic.”

Some centrist and right-wing politicians joined in with the outcry, including Julien Odoul, an MP from the populist right-wing National Rally, who described the images as a “vile provocation.”

Others, however, said the criticism amounted to Islamophobia. Paul Vannier of the far-left France Unbowed party said Braun-Pivet “misunderstands the principle of secularism and, like the far right, she is instrumentalizing it against our Muslim fellow-citizens.” 

“That she targets young children who came to visit our Assembly adds to the ignominy and the stain that her Islamophobic statement constitutes,” he wrote on X.

Marine Tondelier, leader of the Greens, said that the National Assembly’s rules did not prohibit women from wearing the hijab in the public gallery.

“But if it prohibited Islamophobia, many politicians could no longer enter,” she added.

Amid the row, politicians clashed over whether the school ban on religious symbols included school outings. 

“They are part of school time and the same rules apply,” Gerard Larcher, the conservative speaker of the Senate, the upper house of the French parliament, was quoted as saying in The Times.

France’s strict secular rules are often the source of fierce debate in the country.

The government has long been accused of using the laws to target the Muslim community.


National security trial for Hong Kong’s Tiananmen vigil organizers to open

Updated 4 sec ago
Follow

National security trial for Hong Kong’s Tiananmen vigil organizers to open

  • Three government-vetted judges will preside over the trial, which is expected to last 75 days

HONG KONG: Two pro-democracy activists behind a group that for decades organized a vigil that commemorated people killed in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square crackdown in 1989 will stand trial on Thursday, in another landmark case brought under a China-imposed national security law that has practically crushed protests in the semiautonomous Chinese city.
Critics say their case shows that Beijing’s promise to keep the city’s Western-style civil liberties intact for 50 years when the former British colony returned to Chinese rule in 1997 has weakened over time. But the city’s government said its law enforcement actions were evidence-based and strictly in accordance with the law.
Chow Hang-tung and Lee Cheuk-yan, former leaders of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, were charged with incitement to subversion in September 2021 under the law. They are accused of inciting others to organize, plan or act through unlawful means with a view to subvert state power, and if convicted, they face a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison.
A third leader of the group, Albert Ho, is expected to plead guilty, his lawyer said previously. This might result in a sentence reduction.
Before sunrise, dozens of people were in line outside the court building to secure a seat in the public gallery under a cold-weather warning.
Tang Ngok-kwan, a former core member of the alliance, has been queuing since Monday afternoon. He said he wanted to show support for his former colleagues in detention.
“They use their freedom to exchange for a dignified defense,” he said. “It’s about being accountable to history.”
Former pro-democracy district councilor Chan Kim-kam, a former vigil-goer and also Chow’s friend, stayed awake the whole night outside the building.
“We need to witness this, regardless of the results,” she said.
Trial expected to last 75 days
Three government-vetted judges will preside over the trial, which is expected to last 75 days. Videos related to the alliance’s years of work will be part of the prosecution evidence.
Chow, also a lawyer defending herself, tried to throw out her case in November, arguing the prosecution had not specified what “unlawful means” were involved. But the judges rejected her bid.
The judges explained their decision on Wednesday, saying the prosecution made it clear that “unlawful means” meant ending the Chinese Communist Party’s rule and violating the Chinese constitution. The prosecution accused the defendants of promoting the call of “ending one-party rule” by inciting people’s hatred of and disgust over the state’s power, the judges said.
The prosecution, they said, had pointed to the defendants’ media interviews and public speeches related to the alliance to sustain the group’s operation and promote that call to others after the security law took effect in June 2020. Although the scope of the charge was relatively wide, the prosecutors had provided sufficient details for the defendants, they added.
The court will not allow the trial to become a tool of political suppression in the name of law, the judges said.
Prosecutors are expected to detail their case this week.
Urania Chiu, lecturer in law at Oxford Brookes University, said the case goes to the heart of freedom of expression.
“The prosecution case hinges on the argument that the Alliance’s general call for ‘bringing the one-party rule to an end’ constitutes subversion without more, which amounts to criminalizing an idea, a political ideal that is very far from being actualized,” she said.
Sarah Brooks, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director, alleged the case was about “rewriting history and punishing those who refuse to forget the victims of the Tiananmen crackdown.”
Alliance’s disbandment a blow to civil society
The alliance was best known for organizing the only large-scale public commemoration of the 1989 crackdown in China for decades. Tens of thousands of people attended it annually until authorities banned it in 2020, citing anti-pandemic measures.
After COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, the park was occupied instead by a carnival organized by pro-Beijing groups. Those who tried to commemorate the event near the site were detained.
Before the alliance voted to disband in September 2021, police had sought details about the group, saying they had reasonable grounds to believe it was acting as a foreign agent. The alliance rejected the allegations and refused to cooperate.
Chow, Tang, another core member of the alliance were convicted in a separate case in 2023 for failing to provide authorities with information on the group and were each sentenced to 4 1/2 months in prison. But the trio overturned their convictions at the city’s top court in March 2025.
Chow, Lee and Ho have been in custody, awaiting the trial’s opening, which has been postponed twice.
Beijing said the 2020 security law was necessary for the city’s stability following the 2019 protests, which sent hundreds of thousands of people onto the streets.
The same law has convicted dozens of other leading pro-democracy activists, including pro-democracy former media mogul Jimmy Lai last month. Dozens of civil society groups have closed since the law took effect.