justification by the Government.377 However, this decision indicates that the States may be able to justify a ban when they have properly considered students’ freedom of religion.378 In Canada, however, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of a Sikh student that an absolute prohibition, including the small metal ceremonial sword worn by Sikhs, was not justifiable.379 This suggests that, while restrictions may be acceptable (such as restrictions on size and visibility), a total ban is not. We agree. In the United Kingdom, the wearing of religious symbols is generally accommodated by schools.380 In the case of Begum, R (on the application of) v. Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15, the school offered three uniform options to accommodate students’ religious beliefs.381 The uniforms had been carefully designed after consulting Islamic parents and scholars and all prospective students were instructed on the uniform policy. A female Muslim student insisted on wearing a more traditional dress than those provided by the school. The House of Lords held that the uniform policy was within the school’s margin of discretion, pointing out that the girl had the opportunity to choose another school.382 The burqa383 (and, to a lesser extent, Muslim headscarves) encounter special difficulties. Whereas some States require women to wear the burqa,384 other States prohibit wearing it in public.385 Often the authorities, in introducing such a ban, purport to be concerned about this item being used to conceal identity or hide weapons.386 In schools, the exclusion has been justified by the fact that the face must be shown for identity purposes, as well as on the grounds that the burqa is an instrument of oppression of women, that it is a political symbol and on the basis that other students may be disturbed by the presence of students in burqas. 377 HRC Communication No. 931/2000 : Uzbekistan CCPR/C/82/D/931/2000 18 January 2005 at para 6.2. 378 HRC Communication No. 931/2000 : Uzbekistan CCPR/C/82/D/931/2000 18 January 2005 at para 6.2 and see McGoldrick, Human Rights and Religion: The Islamic Headscarf Debate in Europe at 228 - 230. 379 Multani v Commission scolaire Marguerite-Bourgeoys [2006] 1 SCR 256. 380 McGoldrick Human Rights and Religion: The Islamic Headscarf Debate in Europe at 64 and 178 - 180. 381 Begum, R (on the application of) v. Denbigh High School [2006] UKHL 15 at paras 6 – 7. 382 Begum [2006] UKHL 15. 383 A burqa (also burka or burqua) is an all-enveloping outer garment worn by some Muslim women. It is only removed when the women return to the household. 384 The former government in Afghanistan imposed such a requirement. In Iran even foreign women are obliged to wear a headscarf. None of the international human rights bodies has yet considered the issue. 385 In some parts of the United States, Belgium and Italy. There is consideration of a complete ban in the Netherlands. See McGoldrick Human Rights and Religion: The Islamic Headscarf Debate in Europe at 214. 123