The boas themselves are not happy with it and mayor Koen Schuiling is not keen either, but a council majority in Groningen seems to be in favor of a headscarf as part of the uniform of special investigating officers.
Does a religious expression such as a headscarf, yarmulke or cross make the uniform of an authority figure more inclusive or does it actually affect neutrality and create potential safety risks? In the city council, the discussion was quite black and white and Mayor Koen Schuiling is trying to bring back the nuance. Nuance that strengthens the ‘negative voice’, because Schuiling does not like the plan.
The political proponents of religious expressions believe that the municipality of Groningen is now excluding people. A Muslim woman who wears a headscarf cannot go out in uniform as a special investigating officer (BOA). Then the headscarf has to be taken off and that is exactly the sore point. A majority of the parties think it is nonsense that a headscarf affects the neutrality of a boa. “Neutrality lies in your attitude and behavior and not in your appearance,” says Wesley Pechler of the Party for the Animals.
‘It is a uniform, not a pluralistic’
Opponents of a headscarf, yarmulke or cross with the uniform believe that you should not compromise on the uniform. “It is not without reason that a uniform is called a uniform and not multiform,” says Daan Brandenbarg (SP). Opponents believe that a religious expression can certainly provoke discussions. Moreover, they do not see which problem is being solved, because no people have yet come forward who want to become boas and wear religious expressions. They are also afraid that safety may be compromised.
Proponents and opponents of religious expressions in uniform
For Party for the Animals, GroenLinks, Student & City, Christian Union and CDA
In return for SP, VVD, Party for the North, City Party 100% for Groningen and PVV
Do not know yet PvdA and D66
Groningen is not unique in the Netherlands. In Arnhem and Tilburg, boas have been allowed to wear religious expressions such as a headscarf since December last year. No people have yet registered in either city who want this. Utrecht has allowed religious expressions since February 1. There is also a council majority in favor in Rotterdam and Amsterdam, but both cities are still waiting.
Mayor doesn’t want it
The fact that it is a sensitive issue is also evident from the extremely careful words that Mayor Koen Schuiling chooses when he tries to convince the city council not to go ahead with the plan. Schuiling says he is working with the Northern Netherlands police to make the police force more of a reflection of society. Because he acknowledges that this is a problem.
But Schuiling wonders whether being able to wear a headscarf is the right way to achieve more inclusivity. “I do feel some hesitations,” he says. “People who work directly in the security sphere, such as judges, police officers and boas, should not appear to be guided by a philosophy of life. Their neutrality is also a safety issue.”
According to the mayor, it is already happening that people with visible tattoos can be withdrawn from a job if this jeopardizes their safety. “And we are not only dealing with the safety of one official, but also with that of a team. We cannot afford for a colleague not to want to stand next to us. I don’t want boas themselves to be in danger, the neutrality of the government to be jeopardized and teammates to be in danger. That is a threat.”
BOA union thinks it is a bad plan
The Dutch BOA association considers the step taken by cities such as Tilburg and Arnhem and perhaps also Groningen to be a bad thing. Chairman Ruud Kuin, like Schuiling, believes it is important that those in authority avoid any appearance of not being neutral. “Just like the police and judges, we have a special power to deprive citizens of their freedom. You should not allow a religious expression to provoke a discussion in advance.”
There is also reluctance among the Groningen boas. They expect their work to be made unnecessarily more difficult. Boas travel in pairs and then the expression of one can become a problem for the other, they fear. And can a boa wear a yarmulke go to a pro-Palestine demonstration? Or one with a headscarf to a pro-Israel demonstration? No, is Schuiling’s answer. “But I don’t have so many boas that I have the flexibility in the world,” says Schuiling.
‘Don’t see more aggression in other places’
D66 councilor Jim Lo-A-Njoe understands the concern that opponents have when it comes to the safety of boas. “But this transition has already been made among security guards or the NS and they no longer see aggression there. The same applies to police officers in Sweden, Canada and England or Scotland.”
Moreover, not allowing religious expressions out of fear of the reactions is the opposite, says Etkin Armut of the CDA. “We should not give in to that. Tolerance comes first and we as a municipality must set the right example. Not doing so will not solve the problem of hardening in society.”
The debate with Schuiling has made proponents think, but proponents will submit the proposal to allow religious expressions in uniform at the beginning of March. It should become clear on March 6 whether Schuiling has been able to convince the parties.