The story is everywhere, Firdaus denied by the Council of Legal Education from being called to bar because she insisted on wearing her hijab.
That’s it. That’s the entire story. Yes, she graduated from the University of Ilorin (UNILORIN) with a 2:1 and did well in Law School. But all that is besides the point. She was denied because she insisted on wearing a hijab.
There have been arguments for and against her decision.
The people against say rules are rules. There are a lot of them: You’re to wear nothing on your head. You’re to not fix weaves or braid. You must wear a certain kind of shoe. You must wear a certain kind of dress. Rules are rules.
But what are we to do when rules infringe upon our fundamental human rights?
And that’s where the arguments for come in. They say it is her fundamental human right, to wear a hijab. That she wears one has nothing to do with how well or not she dispenses her duties as a lawyer. Her wig fits right on top of the hijab, so there is no disfiguring it.
But are fundamental human rights absolute?
What do you think?