Washington, DC, Sept. 9, 2008-The Institute on Religion and Public Policy has released a new analysis of France's June ruling that denies a Moroccan woman citizenship on the grounds that she had not assimilated enough into French life and values. France has long endured tension between the public expression of personal faith and the state's policy of secularism, but the latest ruling against Faiza Silma marks a new and dangerous trend of intrusion into people's private lives and religion.

Silmi married a French citizen of Moroccan descent in 2000 and has three French-born children. By her own account, she adopted the niqab (a full-body veil that has an opening only for the eyes) at her husband's request after she moved to France. She challenged a 2005 decision from the French Prime Minister's office denying her citizenship, but the French Council of State-the country's highest administrative court-upheld the decision in June. French authorities contend that Silma leads an isolated life in total submission to male relatives and practices radical Islam.

According to the Institute's analysis, written by its Expert Committee on Legislation and Implementation, citizenship is not a right for foreign spouses under French law and the authorities can deny it for reasons of lack of assimilation under the control of administrative courts. However, the State cannot discriminate and deny citizenship because of the practice of a religion.

Patricia Duval, Counsel to the Institute and a member of the Paris bar, notes, "In (Silmi's) case, the Council of State did not base its decision on motives of public order, such as adherence to extremist groups like it had done in the past or problems of identification because the niqab covered the woman's whole face just allowing her to see through a slant. It has ruled for the first time on the basis of the domestic practice of a religion, thereby entering the sphere of private life and beliefs. Such a decision contravenes international human rights standards."

This is a dangerous trend which could lead to further discriminatory evaluations in the area of private religious practice. However, the case law of the Council of State has not in the past followed such a trend: on the contrary, it has played a neutral role for years concerning the wearing of the Muslim veil.

Read the executive summary of the 27 June 2008 Decision of the French Supreme Administrative Court Regarding Wearing of the Muslim Veil (http://www.religionandpolicy.org/show.php?p=1.1.2083).