Face masks raise intriguing questions around privacy, security, faith and identity
Loading player...
The mandatory wearing of masks in public raises intriguing questions around privacy, profiling, security, and even faith and identity.
Countries such as France and Belgium have fought bitter cultural battles for more than a decade over attempts to ban Muslim women from covering their faces in public. While the hijab headscarf is usually unrestricted, veils that cover the face partially or entirely have been outlawed.
However, those who wear veils say these are not just expressions of faith and modesty; they also allow for freedom of movement safe from prying eyes, and are demonstrations of social identity.
Though French lawmakers tried to take any prejudicial edge off by ensuring the ban applied to all forms of face coverings, from winter-warming balaclavas to motorcyclists’ windbreakers, the ban — instituted in 2011 — is widely seen as Islamophobic.
France’s example was followed by neighbour Belgium, then rapidly by a patchwork of others. Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, Latvia, Bulgaria and Tajikistan all imposed national bans on masks in public places, while Spain, Germany, Italy, Russia, China, Niger, Cameroon and Malaysia apply bans in particular regions or cities. In Quebec and Turkey, public officials are barred from covering their faces.
Now, confronted with Covid-19, several of these countries have ruled that masks must be worn in public to limit the spread of the virus.
It’s an irony that has not been lost on political commentators, ethics professors and civil liberties activists. Marco Perolini, writing for Amnesty International, says the pandemic has disrupted conventions on face coverings.
"Policymakers must use this opportunity to scrap laws prohibiting the wearing of full-face veils and blanket bans on wearing face masks in protests," he writes. The ridiculous alternative is "requiring people to wear face masks to fight against Covid-19 and, at the same time, fining women for wearing full-face veils or protesters [for] covering their faces".
Prior to Covid, security concerns around the use of masks had resulted in them being outlawed in jurisdictions including Hong Kong and France. But Perolini believes "masks are essential for protesting in places where there are very legitimate concerns about the use of facial recognition technology. Protecting public order does not justify a blanket ban on face masks in any protest."
In any case, face coverings no longer guarantee anonymity. Facial recognition technology has advanced to the point where, once a person’s full face has been scanned, cameras may still be able ...
Countries such as France and Belgium have fought bitter cultural battles for more than a decade over attempts to ban Muslim women from covering their faces in public. While the hijab headscarf is usually unrestricted, veils that cover the face partially or entirely have been outlawed.
However, those who wear veils say these are not just expressions of faith and modesty; they also allow for freedom of movement safe from prying eyes, and are demonstrations of social identity.
Though French lawmakers tried to take any prejudicial edge off by ensuring the ban applied to all forms of face coverings, from winter-warming balaclavas to motorcyclists’ windbreakers, the ban — instituted in 2011 — is widely seen as Islamophobic.
France’s example was followed by neighbour Belgium, then rapidly by a patchwork of others. Denmark, the Netherlands, Austria, Latvia, Bulgaria and Tajikistan all imposed national bans on masks in public places, while Spain, Germany, Italy, Russia, China, Niger, Cameroon and Malaysia apply bans in particular regions or cities. In Quebec and Turkey, public officials are barred from covering their faces.
Now, confronted with Covid-19, several of these countries have ruled that masks must be worn in public to limit the spread of the virus.
It’s an irony that has not been lost on political commentators, ethics professors and civil liberties activists. Marco Perolini, writing for Amnesty International, says the pandemic has disrupted conventions on face coverings.
"Policymakers must use this opportunity to scrap laws prohibiting the wearing of full-face veils and blanket bans on wearing face masks in protests," he writes. The ridiculous alternative is "requiring people to wear face masks to fight against Covid-19 and, at the same time, fining women for wearing full-face veils or protesters [for] covering their faces".
Prior to Covid, security concerns around the use of masks had resulted in them being outlawed in jurisdictions including Hong Kong and France. But Perolini believes "masks are essential for protesting in places where there are very legitimate concerns about the use of facial recognition technology. Protecting public order does not justify a blanket ban on face masks in any protest."
In any case, face coverings no longer guarantee anonymity. Facial recognition technology has advanced to the point where, once a person’s full face has been scanned, cameras may still be able ...
