Putri Anggraini
Milan, Italy – At the al-Wahid mosque, nestled in a quiet courtyard within Milan's lively Navigli district, worshippers gathering for Friday prayers responded with confusion to the Italian government's newly announced prohibition on face-covering garments in schools. The measure, unveiled by Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, has renewed a long-running European debate over religious expression, secular values, and the political uses of Muslim dress.
Mulayka Laura Enriello, a 58-year-old mathematics teacher at a high school, said she has never encountered a student wearing a burqa or niqab during her entire career. While a number of schoolgirls wear headscarves, she explained, nobody interferes with them—neither instructors nor fellow pupils. The proposed restriction, she argued, feels unnecessarily harsh, particularly when applied to young people who may simply believe they are acting in accordance with their faith. She stressed that if a girl arrived at school fully covered, sending her home would be unacceptable; the appropriate response would be to treat her as a minor in need of understanding.
Meloni presented the ban on Sunday during a rally of her nationalist conservative Brothers of Italy party, framing the move as a step toward gender equality. She declared that students must attend school with their faces visible, asserting that no one in Italy should be able to require a young woman to conceal herself based on tradition, whether genuine or imagined. According to the state-run Ansa news agency, only an estimated 500 to 600 female students nationwide currently wear full-face coverings—a figure that critics say underscores how marginal the practice actually is.
Imam Yahya Pallavicini, who leads the Milan mosque and serves as vice president of the Italian Islamic Religious Community, described the ban as a response to a "false problem." In his view, the government is concentrating public attention on a garment worn by a tiny minority, thereby distorting how Islam is perceived. He argued that the initiative promotes a monolithic vision of society—one that is white supremacist in character—and caricatures anything different through a specious focus on the burqa. Pallavicini characterized the plan as intellectually dishonest, saying it maligns a small segment of Muslim society that is deemed less palatable to the broader Italian public.
The political symbolism surrounding the issue extends beyond Italy's borders. Female activists affiliated with the French far-right group Collectif Nemesis staged a theatrical protest at the annual rally of Italy's populist League party in Pontida last week, removing full-face coverings on stage while the crowd chanted "liberta"—the Italian word for freedom. The spectacle drew comparisons to a much older historical episode.
Renata Pepicelli, a professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Pisa, said the stunt echoed the actions of French colonial authorities in Algeria in 1958, when groups of Algerian women removed and burned their veils—sometimes under coercion—as a display of allegiance to Paris. Pepicelli noted that the veil remains a "battlefield," and that its removal continues to symbolize social dominance. She connected Meloni's proposed ban directly to this broader climate of cultural confrontation.
Notably, the decree itself avoids explicit references to burqas or niqabs. Instead, it prohibits participation in school with a full-face covering or through any other method that prevents identification. This language, according to legal experts, places the measure within an existing framework rather than creating an entirely new category of offense.
Nico Tonti, a researcher in the department of legal studies at the University of Bologna, explained that Italian law already forbids wearing items in public that make personal identification difficult, unless a "valid reason" exists. That clause, he said, has long been at the center of tensions between religious freedom and public order. Over the years, Italian jurisprudence has gradually recognized religious observance as a valid reason that can exempt individuals from prosecution. Tonti added that while the directive has taken effect, Parliament retains the ability to scrutinize its proportionality to the stated objectives and its compatibility with religious freedom protections.
Observers suggest the timing of the ban reflects political calculations rather than an urgent social problem. With the campaign for the 2027 elections already underway, Meloni faces a challenge from her right flank. The National Future party, led by former general Roberto Vannacci, has gained ground since its creation in February, reaching eight percent in public opinion surveys. This pressure from a newer far-right competitor appears to be shaping the government's agenda.
Lorenzo Castellani, a professor of the History of Political Institutions at LUISS University, said the prime minister is working to project a more hardline, nationalist direction. By approving this legislation, Castellani argued, Meloni is sending a strong signal to right-wing voters for whom security and immigration are top concerns. He predicted that Meloni would center her electoral campaign on three themes: immigration, security, and political stability. The first two allow her to address her base directly without ceding leadership on identity issues to Vannacci.
The third theme—stability—sets her apart. Castellani explained that Meloni can present herself not only as a capable leader responsive to public demands but also as the head of a government able to deliver results. That argument carries particular weight given Italy's reputation for chronic political instability. Earlier this month, Meloni set a record by leading the country's longest-lasting government since World War II, surpassing Silvio Berlusconi's mark of 1,412 consecutive days in power.
Castellani predicted that Meloni would attempt to capitalize on that achievement in the next elections, linking immigration and security to the broader theme of governmental continuity. For Italy's Muslim communities, however, the debate over a garment worn by a few hundred students carries a more personal weight. As Enriello observed, politicians often forget that there are human beings behind their divisive rhetoric—young people whose faith and choices deserve to be treated with dignity rather than political calculation.
Comments (0)