The latest book by linguist Steven Pinker, When everyone knows that everyone knows...Published in Spanish by Paidós, this book deals with common knowledge, the cognitive system that allows us to be aware of what others know. That is, what we know everyone knows. These are the kinds of mental faculties that allow us to navigate life as couples, families, in society, and as citizens. Without an awareness of what we think and what we know others think, it is impossible to share a common space, impossible to live with others. It is necessary to establish tacit consensus, norms we follow even before they are codified in law. This is why common knowledge becomes an essential vector of freedom of expression, academic freedom, and freedom of thought.

When the French Parliament established by law in 2010 the first ban on the full-face veil in Europe, it was said that the Republic "could not be lived with a veiled face." vivre ensembleThis led the French legislator to declare, in the preamble to the law, that "no one may, in public spaces, wear clothing intended to conceal their face." Therefore, the basis for this prohibition was not so much the classic argument of republican secularism—invoked years earlier to eradicate the veil from schools—as a factor linked to security and public order: the fact that people cannot mask their identity behind a garment. This is not a new idea. In school, we learned about the famous Squillace riot, the popular uprising that took place in Madrid during the reign of Charles III, motivated, among other things, by the prohibition of wearing long capes and wide-brimmed hats that concealed the face.

"It is a degrading fact". This is how blunt the President of the Generalitat, Salvador Illa, was when asked about the burqa in his first interview after his medical leave. The head of the Catalan executive was positioning himself on a topic that Vox has introduced into the media agenda, and which gained traction when the PP announced it would support the ban in Congress. Junts distanced itself, but counterattacked with its own proposal in the same direction, something that ERC also began to study a few days later. And in the same way that Vox has placed the debate on the burqa in the spotlight in Congress, Aliança Catalana has brought it to Parliament. Who has not yet taken any steps forward is the PSC. What do the socialists think about this debate?

The debate on the use of the burqa and niqab in public spaces has re-emerged on the Spanish political scene. There are various proposals on the table and it seems that, this time, there is a political interest in regulating it. For the moment, Congress has rejected Vox's proposal, but the far-right's insistence on this issue has been decisive in prompting the rest of the parliamentary spectrum to start taking positions. In this regard, Junts has put forward an alternative proposal focused on people's security and identification – rather than on religious freedom –a path that the PSOE has shown itself open to studying. PP and ERC have also had their say, proposing a ban that would not entail fines for women, but rather participation in social activities. However, the possible constitutionality of a law of this nature in Spain raises profound legal questions that oblige us to look towards Strasbourg and analyze the limits of our own fundamental rights system.A void of precedents: the weight of organic law

Currently, the Constitutional Court (TC) does not have clear jurisprudence or precedents that would allow us to accurately predict its verdict on a general ban. "The Spanish legal framework is in a situation of uncertainty. We are in a territory of fictional constitutionalism," points out María Itziar Gómez Fernández, former TC lawyer and professor of constitutional law at the Carlos III University of Madrid, in conversation with ARA.Until now, the only relevant pronouncement in Spain came from the Supreme Court (TS) following municipal ordinances that prohibited the full veil in spaces like those in Lleida. Joan Lluís Pérez Francesch, professor of constitutional law at the Autonomous University of Barcelona, explains to ARA that "the TS made it clear that any limitation of a fundamental right such as religious freedom should be done through an organic law that regulated the limitations related to religious freedom".The mirror of the ECHR

Given the lack of internal doctrine, the gaze is inevitably drawn to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which has already ruled on measures adopted in France and Belgium. However, a fundamental difference in context should be highlighted. "In France and Belgium, the principle of secularism is very clearly contained in their constitutional texts," explains Gómez. In contrast, "in Spain, we have a system of respect for religious freedom that is constitutionally enshrined," which could oblige the Constitutional Court to look at the issue with different eyes.One of the key points of Strasbourg's jurisprudence has been the strategy of moving away from the strictly religious sphere to save the constitutionality of the ban. Pérez Francesch points out that "if it is linked to religious freedom, religious freedom always wins, as any limitation of it is very difficult to justify." "These countries used concepts such as public safety and, above all, the principle of 'democratic coexistence,'" he highlights.Red lines: against general bans

Despite the ECtHR's endorsement of certain bans, there are red lines that the Spanish Constitutional Court would have to scrupulously respect to adapt to the Council of Europe system. The main premise is that "general bans are not useful, they are not valid. A universal prohibitory measure cannot be applied based solely on abstract concepts such as security or gender dignity," highlights Gómez."The TC could not analyze a ban in block, but would have to focus on specific measures. It is not the same to restrict the use of the burqa in an administrative office for identification reasons as to do so on the street or in a university," indicates the former lawyer. "These specific issues are what would allow for a specific proportionality judgment."The proportionality test and the search for real purpose

To determine the constitutionality of a possible law, the TC will have to apply a three-step proportionality test: analyze whether the purpose of the ban is suitable, necessary, and proportional. For suitability, the key is the purpose. "The legislator would have to openly declare what it intends: is it a real security problem or is it a paternalistic view?" highlights Gómez Fernández. "In what way do we consider that prohibiting a piece of clothing worn only by women protects their dignity?" It would also be necessary to assess whether the measure is proportional or if "flies are being killed with cannons," he explains. "If the limitation affects an infinitesimal percentage of the population and generates a persecution effect towards a certain religion, it is very likely that the measure will be considered disproportionate depending on the circumstances of the specific case."The snag of control

The arrival of the norm at the TC would also not be exempt from uncertainty. Parliamentary arithmetic would complicate an unconstitutionality appeal if the major parties agreed on the law. Without the minimum of 50 deputies or senators needed to challenge it directly, abstract control could be initially blocked. However, the path would not be closed: any affected woman could go to the Constitutional Court via an appeal for protection. As happened in France and Belgium, the review of the norm would come from the bottom up, through the protection of individual rights and specific litigation.

]]>

One of the hottest debates this week in the Congress of Deputies It has been the burka ban promoted by VoxAlthough it failed to pass and only garnered the votes of the People's Party (PP), the far-right initiative opened the floodgates of discussion on the appropriateness of prohibiting the use of the full-face veil. Together for Catalonia (Juntos) presented a bill on the same day to ban it in public spaces—a text that the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE) has agreed to consider—the PP followed suit two days later, and the Republican Left of Catalonia (ERC) has also submitted its own proposal. According to party sources, the Republicans are not in favor of prohibiting the full-face veil and imposing criminal penalties on women who violate it, but they do advocate for "discouraging" its use through mandatory community service. This is their "effective solution" to "end the burka" while preventing the measure from harming the women who wear it, they believe. "Making the burka a crime will isolate them even more," warned ERC leader Oriol Junqueras this week.

]]>

The Enlightenment is not an outdated and obsolete chapter in the history of ideas, but rather the normative core of liberal democracy. It is, above all, the political commitment to replacing submission to tradition, dogma, and the whims of power with autonomy, and to replacing authoritarianism with critical thinking. Kant summarized it when he said that the Enlightenment is "humankind's emergence from its self-imposed immaturity." And with the advance of reactionary darkness, we must remember that light is preferable to darkness and that the defense of democracy continues.

]]>

The Congress of Deputies rejected Vox's proposal, supported by the PP, to ban the grim black cloth that covers some Muslim women from head to toe, complete with a mesh eye panel (quite a detail), called the burka. Junts has presented its own proposal to ban it, and the PNV proposes creating a subcommittee and calls for "a calm debate." Silvia Paneque, of the PSC, said that it generates "negativity" within Catalan society and that it must be studied from the perspective of "security" and its nature as an element "of identity that can lead to confrontation between people."

]]>

Only bad faith or utter ignorance could give credence to Vox and its proposal to ban the burka and niqab in public spaces. They speak of "our culture" as if theirs were everyone's. Their stale patriotism, their Francoist nostalgia, their radical misogyny, and their freedom-crushing attitude are certainly not "our culture." But what's surprising isn't Vox's racism, but the ineptitude of a left wing that doesn't seem to see these things coming, and out of laziness, mediocrity, or cowardice, allows certain thorny issues to fester until they erupt in controversies like the one we're seeing these days.

]]>

Yesterday's interview with Salvador Illa on TV3 was disappointing due to its lack of relevance. The President of the Generalitat said what I predicted he would say yesterday: that he will continue doing what he has been doing, that solutions are not quick, and that it is essential that his investiture partners, Esquerra and Comuns, not create insurmountable obstacles to passing the budget. He also stated that there will be neither changes in the government nor a vote of confidence. He raised his voice slightly to say that "enough with the anti-Catalan sentiment," and added that he, personally, didn't like the burka. And with that, the interview ended, and good night.

]]>

The burka is another of those scare tactics that the right wing inflates to the extreme in order to create social alarm, as well as tension, polarization, and, of course, hatred against specific population groups; in this case, Arab immigrants. Women forced to wear burkas in our towns and cities belong to the same category as squatters who break into homes while one is out shopping, viruses and vaccines experimented on all of humanity, and dark-skinned rapists lurking in even darker corners. These are fear stories based on specific (mostly fabricated) cases that right-wing and far-right parties, media outlets, and social networks sensationalize and spread misinformation.

]]>

Yesterday we published a new fragment of the Diary of an Afghan journalistShe explained that years ago she used to wear jeans until the Taliban banned them. Then she decided to wear them under a long, black abaya as a private act of disobedience, until that too was banned. "Now when I stand in front of the mirror, it's not to see how I look, but to make sure no one sees me, that is, that I'm covered from head to toe," she explains.

]]>

Allow me the verbal trap, but I think it can serve to open our eyes even further in the current debate on the public use of the Islamic veil. Left-wing parties believe that a secular state should give everyone the freedom to dress as they wish, whether with religious connotations or not, while the other parties argue that secularism should precisely free women (and especially girls) from wearing the veil, or protect them from a patriarchal tradition. Both positions cite secularism as the basis of their arguments, although the far right emphasizes the protection of Christian or Catholic tradition. But what we often miss is that we do live in a secular society. Much more than we think. It's not exactly a religion, but it is a dogma. A series of undeniable principles. Almost a faith.

]]>

He sign The celebration of Women's Day in Castellvell del Camp shows us the portraits of eight women, cut outs on a lilac background. There is a young woman, with dark skin, with a hairstyle on her head (a bun) that suggests an afro. One who looks like a child, with – I would say – a veil. Another, also young, with her eyes closed and smiling, with blonde hair. Another with a veil, who also has her eyes closed and is smiling. One with dark hair, with bangs. One with a high-necked sweater and curly hair, with a serious demeanor. One with medium-length hair, with clothes that look like an office outfit. And one with a burka. We don't know if this one is smiling or not.

]]>