Burqa in court: Muslim woman wanted men to ‘look the other way’ if she gave evidence

A MUSLIM woman who is suing the police over a terrorism raid at her house insisted she would only show her face in court if all the men in the room looked away. But magistrates look set to knock the demand back. READ THE COURT TRANSCRIPT

Moutia Elzahed refused to take off her burqa to give evidence in court yesterday. She failed to show up to the hearing today.

• Muslim woman refuses to remove burqa to give evidence in court
• Read the COURT TRANSCRIPT

MAGISTRATES could follow the path set by a District Court judge who insisted a woman remove her veil before giving evidence.

The NSW Law Society said she it expected the Local Court will now refer to Judge Audrey Balla’s no-nonsense decision when tackling the problem of hearing evidence from Muslim women.

Judge Balla refused to hear evidence from Moutia Elzahed — who is suing the police over a terrorism raid on her Revesby home — because she would not remove her veil while men were in the court.

Moutia Elzahed leaving court yesterday.

Ms Elzahed is the second wife of convicted IS recruiter Hamdi Alqudsi.

His other wife Carnita Matthews also had a very public fight with authorities over a veil.

Ms Elzahed, Alqudsi and her two teenage sons are suing the Commonwealth of Australia and NSW for assault and battery during the Operation Appleby counter-terrorism raids on September 18, 2014.

The court transcript reveals Ms Elzahed instructed her barrister Clive Evatt to request she keep her veil on while giving evidence or, alternatively, that all the men in the courtroom look away. “There is a slightly unusual religious problem,” Mr Evatt said.

“She can show her face to women but not men. What I suggest is that she gets in the witness box, reveals her face to your Honour and any other woman in the court and the men look the other way.”

“I don’t know if I am happy with that,” Judge Balla replied.

“Are you proposing that she would have her face covered while she is giving evidence and being cross-examined?”

“I’m afraid so. Yes. It is not very satisfactory, your Honour, but it is something we have to live with,” Mr Evatt said.

“It is not something I have to live with,” Judge Balla replied.

Moutia Elzahed leaves the court.

Judge Balla tried to find a compromise by offering to close the court to the public or allow Ms Elzahed to give evidence in another room that would be transmitted by an audiovisual link.

But Judge Balla insisted that even if Ms Elzahed took up those options she would still need to show her face while being examined and cross-examined by the three male barristers stating it was important “to be fair to all parties” and she needed to see her face “to assess her credibility.”

NSW Law Society president-elect Pauline Wright said although efforts should be made to accommodate people’s religion it was crucial for a judge to be able to see someone’s face.

“Without all the tools of communication at their disposal, a Judge will be at a disadvantage,” Ms Wright said.

She said although the judgement was not binding on the District or Local Court, “

“magistrates will probably be referring to this decision if they are in a case where they thought it was appropriate to require a witness to give evidence without the veil.”

Since the raid, Alqudsi has faced a trial and been convicted of helping seven men travel to Syria to fight with Islamist rebels, including Islamic State in the civil war.

He is serving a sentence of eight years with a non-parole period of six years.

His other wife Carnita Matthews was found guilty in 2010 of falsely accusing a police officer of ripping off her burqa during a traffic stop.

That conviction was quashed on appeal the following year when District Judge Clive Jeffreys ruled there was no way of knowing who had been the woman under the burqa when the false allegations were made. Subs: don’t cut

Ms Elzahed’s civil case continues.

OTHER NEWS