## Facts

- The Ministry of Education issued a public-school uniform regulation addressing girls’ dress.
- The regulation, as amended after public criticism, permitted a hair-covering headscarf only with written parental consent and prohibited face veiling; violations were subject to school discipline, including expulsion.
- Mahmud Sami Muhammad ‘Ali Wasil, acting for his minor daughters enrolled in public schools, sought to have them wear veiling at school.
- Wasil challenged the regulation as inconsistent with constitutional incorporation of the “principles of Islamic sharī‘a” and as violating constitutional rights, including freedom of religion and freedom of expression.
- An administrative court referred the constitutional questions to the Supreme Constitutional Court for review of the regulation’s constitutionality.

## Issues

1. Whether a ministerial regulation restricting face veiling and conditioning the headscarf on parental consent violates Article 2’s requirement that the principles of Islamic sharī‘a be the principal source of legislation.
2. Whether the regulation infringes constitutional protections for freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and related rights concerning education, personal autonomy, and family life.

## Decision

- The Supreme Constitutional Court upheld the constitutionality of the Ministry’s dress-code regulation.
- The Court held the regulation did not contravene the constitutional “principles of Islamic sharī‘a.”
- The Court held the regulation was consistent with constitutional rights, given the State’s authority to organize public education and regulate the school environment.
- The Court rejected the constitutional challenge and left the regulation in force.

## Legal Principles

- Constitutional “principles of Islamic sharī‘a” are general normative principles, not a mandate to enforce contested, detailed juristic rules; where significant juristic disagreement exists, the State retains regulatory discretion.
- In assessing Article 2 claims, the court may distinguish broad sharī‘a principles from historically contingent doctrinal opinions and may apply judicial legal reasoning to identify relevant constitutional principles.
- Freedom of religion and freedom of expression are protected but may be regulated in specific institutional settings when restrictions are tied to legitimate objectives of the institution and do not amount to a general prohibition on belief or worship.
- The State has authority to regulate public-school conditions to serve educational policy goals such as order, discipline, equality among students, and effective pedagogy.
- Regulations affecting minors in schools may account for parental role and child welfare; restrictions may be justified by needs such as student identification, classroom interaction, and maintaining a non-coercive educational environment.

## Conclusion

The Supreme Constitutional Court sustained the Ministry of Education’s school-uniform rules limiting veiling, concluding that Article 2 did not constitutionalize a single disputed rule on face covering and that the targeted restrictions in public schools were permissible regulations consistent with constitutional freedoms and the State’s educational responsibilities.


Wasil v. Minister of Education, Case No. 8, Judicial Year 17 (Egypt S. Const. Ct. 1996)