A compromised verdict: Unpacking top London school’s Muslim prayer ban

In mid-April, the British High Court upheld Muslim prayer ban at Michaela Community School, in north-west London, sparking criticism from legal experts and distinguished members of the country’s Muslim community.

The sore point between a Muslim student and the authorities of the renowned school was concerning what constitutes the right to practise one's faith versus abiding by the school’s secular charter.

On March 27, 2023, during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, a group of Muslim students prayed together in the playground of the school, where roughly half the 700 pupils are Muslim.

This prompted the school's governing body to introduce the "prayer ritual policy" (PRP), which is a misnomer for a ban imposed as an “interim measure”.

Just three months later, by May 2023, the measure mutated into a fully fledged prayer ban, even applying to students who wanted to pray individually. Therefore, one female student, who was barred from praying during her lunch break, took the school to court, drawing public attention to what she believed was a discriminatory policy targeting Muslim students.

She wanted to pray dhuhr, the midday prayer, which takes only five minutes.

Much to the dismay of the student, whose identity is protected by an anonymity order, Justice Thomas Linden’s written ruling was in itself contradictory. On the one hand, Justice Linden said the school’s PRP measure “indirectly discriminates” against Muslim students due to their specific prayer requirements. But in the same breath, he ruled that the student had the option to change schools, concluding the prayer ban was “proportionate”.

Several legal experts and Muslim advocacy groups have pointed out flaws in the judgement, stating that it lacked legal merit and posed the danger of normalising religious intolerance targeting vulnerable communities at places of learning.

A myopic view of secularism

Basharat Ali, a London-based solicitor advocate, dissects the judgement, highlighting its inherent contradictions and potential further ramifications.

Ali argues that the school in question claims to be secular, but in the case of allowing communal worship it is following the British law of offering space for daily prayers with a “broadly Christian nature”.

Ali explains the Michaela Community School is classified as a free school and it receives public funding while operating independently.

“If the school had no act or form of worship at all, its defence would be coherent,” Ali says.

Since the school claims to be the adherent of secularism while simultaneously conducting daily Christian rituals and observing Christian holidays, this leaves space for hurting the religious sentiments of non-Christian students, whose acts of worship draw icy-glares of criticism and disapproval from teachers and in worst case scenarios, a legal tussle that fails to deliver justice.

Four days after the student sued the school on January 17 2024, the school’s headmistress Katherine Birbalsingh appeared on a radio talk show. She defended the school’s action saying no prayers of any nature are allowed on the school premises.

Birbalsingh gave a myopic view of secularism, saying the school celebrates Christmas every year, entertaining students with Christmas trees and Santa Claus. For her, celebrating the Christian festival is "very secular".

Six days after Birbalsingh’s radio interview, her spokesperson clarified that the school did host daily “communal worship” focused on“spiritual, moral, social, and cultural education”, which as per the school authorities is the requirement set by the UK’s Department for Education.

Solicitor Ali contends that such actions undermine the school's assertion of religious neutrality and raise questions about its commitment to diversity and inclusivity.

Given that state schools are inherently unable to be entirely secular due to regulatory laws, Ali said denying a group the right to practise their faith differently poses a challenge.

UK judge, not Islamic jurist

In the court document, the student and her mother argued that the school's refusal to accommodate the midday Muslim prayer violated her right to freedom of religious expression, protected under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

The school, in its defence, has argued that “she could move to another school”, which permitted her to pray, “if the ability to pray at lunchtime is sufficiently important to her.”

British Muslim lawyer Majid Iqbal says the court ruling overlooks the “practical challenges and disruption” associated with changing schools, especially midway through the academic year.

“This is where the Judge has made a significant error and not taken into account the mitigating factors in respect of an argument that moving schools part way through the year (especially in year 9) is very difficult and can be extremely disruptive to the academic process,” says Iqbal, who also runs Islamophobia Response Unit (IRU), an independent charity providing legal guidance to people affected by anti-Muslim incidents tells TRT World.

“The school was successful due to the Judge unreasonably favouring the Defendant’s evidence over the Claimant’s”.

Stubbornly defending the ban, the school authorities made attempts to interpret Muslim rituals – assuming the mantle of Islamic jurists.

During the hearing, the court echoed the school’s interpretation of Islamic obligatory prayers that if the student missed any prayers during the school hours, they can perform “Qada”, a make-up prayer performed after the expiration of designated time for any of the five daily prayers.

For practising Muslims, however, the concept of Qada is applicable on rare occasions.

“Qada should not be regarded as an alternative practice to missed prayers,” the student and her mother said, citing a scholarly paper written by Mona Siddiqui, Professor of Islamic and Interreligious Studies and Assistant Principal for Religion and Society at the University of Edinburgh.

French model of secularism is coming to UK

Solicitor Ali said the school’s attitude towards Muslim students reflects broader political trends veering towards religious intolerance in the UK.

The school receiving endorsements from figures associated with far-right ideologies like Suella Braverman, who previously chaired the school's governors, further underscore this political dimension.

“The problem is that the French model of secularism is now coming into the UK”, he says.

Many struggle to view the recent high court ruling in light of the broader landscape of surging Islamophobia. London-based lawyer Iqbal questions whether the reaction would be the same if a Christian or Jewish student was prevented from praying during lunch break.

“The media and various other institutions would be livid and we would see a wave of support for those pupils,” he says.

Meanwhile, the court ruling has excited Britain’s far-right.

Rachel Johnson, sister of former UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, lauded the ruling as a triumph for “British values”, advocating for a nationwide ban on religious practices in all state schools.

“When at school, do what you are told by the teacher. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. When in Britain, be British,” Johnson asserts.