Magistrate walks out as woman defendant appears in a full veil

Ian Murray pulled out of the hearing when Zoobia Hussain appeared in a niqab, which covers the head and the face apart from the eyes.

Scroll down for more...

Mr Murray, 65, a taxi driver who has been a JP for 12 years, refused to give any reason for his walkout.

He could be suspended from the bench after Hussain's lawyers confirmed that they were making a formal complaint about it.

Last autumn, Jack Straw - now the Justice Secretary - caused controversy when he said that he asked female constituents wearing full veils to remove them when they attended his surgeries.

Shortly afterwards a judge halted an immigration case in Stoke-on-Trent after a Muslim lawyer refused to take off her niqab when he said he could not hear what she was saying.

Since then, new rules have been issued to judges and magistrates saying the wearing of full veils in court is acceptable unless it interferes with the administration of justice.

Scroll down for more...

Hussain, 32, believed to be a mother of five, appeared for what was due to be a brief administrative hearing this week before bench chairman Mr Murray and two colleagues at Manchester Magistrates Court.

She denies causing £5,000 worth of criminal damage including graffiti to a housing association property from which she had been evicted.

Her solicitor, Judith Hawkins, said Hussain wanted to appear in the dock in the niqab because she "observed the Muslim religion and remains covered in public places when men are present".

Mr Murray then stunned those in court by saying he was withdrawing from the case because she was wearing a niqab, adding: "I do not feel I have to give any reasons. This is my personal view."

Hussain, from the Crumpsall district of Manchester, told her solicitor his walkout was "scandalous". She added: "There is a human being under here."

A full-time district judge later adjourned Hussain's trial until July 18, while Mr Murray resumed hearing other cases before his court.

The guidance issued in April says judges and magistrates should consider cases where defendants, victims, witnesses and lawyers wish to wear the niqab sensitively and on their individual merits.

A balance should be struck between the rights of Muslim women who wish to be veiled in the presence of men and the interests of justice, with the latter always paramount, it adds.

Grounds for requesting the removal of a niqab could include ascertaining someone's identity or assessing whether they were telling the truth.

On defendants and witnesses, the guidance states: "Whilst it may be more difficult in some cases to assess the evidence of a woman wearing a niqab, the experiences of judges in other cases have shown that it is possible to do so."

Court insiders said Mr Murray's walkout appeared to breach the guidelines as he gave no reasons and Hussain was not due to give evidence that day anyway.

A disciplinary inquiry conducted by the local magistrates' committee will be held into the complaint by Hussain's solicitors and could lead to him being suspended.

A decision about whether he will be able to hear cases in the meantime will be taken next week.

Mr Murray has refused to comment. But the court released a statement saying that he accepted he had got it wrong.

"Mr Murray is concerned about questions of identity when the full veil is worn in court," it said.

"However, he agrees that he acted unwisely in disqualifying himself without giving reasons and acknowledges that he should have sought the advice of his legal adviser in court and discussed the provisions of the national guidelines with his colleagues on the bench before taking action.

"Mr Murray is supportive of those of different faiths and cultural traditions and acknowledges and regrets his action could be misinterpreted."

Hussain would not comment after the case, but her solicitor said she had been "shocked and distressed", adding: "She suffered hurt feelings and felt intimidated and deeply embarrassed".