-
Chelsea boss Alonso for yearns for 'boring game' after Hull make their point
-
Frustrated Hamilton urges Ferrari to 'work harder'
-
'Tired' Liverpool must adapt to schedule, says Iraola
-
Zelensky ready to meet Putin at Miami G20 but Kremlin refuses
-
Stunning US fightback sets up Solheim Cup singles showdown
-
Anthropic boss calls for AI slowdown, Altman and Musk agree
-
Monaco's perfect Ligue 1 start ends with Strasbourg draw
-
England back on track after 'chaos', says Root
-
Ukraine's economy hobbled by Russian strikes
-
Shelton chases history in US Open title tilt with top seed Zverev
-
France sink Germany to reach first women's basketball World Cup final
-
Norris 'masterpiece' snatches Spanish GP pole from Antonelli
-
Hull hold Chelsea, Liverpool fail to beat Fulham in Premier League
-
Mas on brink of Vuelta triumph as Landa claims stage 20
-
Nmecha and Silva keep Dortmund perfect in Bundesliga
-
No Kerr clash as Ingebrigtsen pulls out of Ultimate 1,500m
-
Norris snatches thrilling Spanish GP pole from Antonelli
-
Anthropic boss calls for slowing pace of AI development
-
'Great to have a race at home': Fans celebrate F1's Madrid return
-
BRICS nations call for 'maximum restraint' in Middle East war
-
French IT giant Capgemini sells subsidiary after row over ICE links
-
England v Pakistan Test series: Three talking points
-
Thousands rally in Kosovo ahead of ex-leader's war crimes verdict
-
Marquez snatches San Marino MotoGP sprint ahead of Bezzecchi
-
Zelensky ready to meet Putin at G20 in Miami
-
Philippine ferry fire death toll climbs to 76 as identification process begins
-
Gaza film, 'irreverent' Malkovich drama vie for Venice top prize
-
BRICS nations urge 'maximum restraint' in Middle East war
-
Fit-again Bumrah needs game time, says India skipper Iyer
-
Zelensky open to meeting Putin at G20 in Miami
-
Antonelli fastest again in crash-hit final practice
-
England survive scare to seal 3-0 sweep against Pakistan
-
From obscurity to smashing sixes: Pakistan's Razaullah rises to stardom
-
Trump says Irish unification would be 'fantastic'
-
Bezzecchi takes pole for San Marino MotoGP
-
Bodies of Philippines ferry fire victims brought ashore as toll hits 35
-
China, Russia, Iran leaders gather in India as BRICS nations seek common ground
-
Flick warns Barca stars to keep focus after perfect start
-
Korda finally beaten as Europe grasp slender Solheim lead
-
Trump in Ireland for golf tournament, diplomatic pleasantries
-
Zelensky says willing to meet Putin at G20 in Miami: interview
-
French police suspect train derailment was sabotage
-
Quebec Brokerage Qubit Insurance Announces New Data on Coverage Shortfalls as Rebuilding Costs Rise
-
Trump lands in Ireland for golf tournament, PM talks
-
Trump asks Smithsonian to install George Washington statues, exhibition
-
Xi lands in India for BRICS summit overshadowed by war
-
'A legend': Celine Dion poised for emotional comeback in Paris
-
From crime to the Arctic: ultramarathoner film debuts in Toronto
-
Europe eyes battle over 'pervert' AI glasses
-
Back to the drawing board for disappointed Tiafoe
Top French court upholds hijab ban in women's football
France's top administrative court on Thursday upheld a ban on women football players wearing Islamic hijab headscarves, after the issue was seized on by politicians claiming secularism was at risk.
"Sporting federations whose task is to ensure the good functioning of public services... can impose a neutrality requirement on their players in competitions and sporting events, to guarantee the smooth running of matches and any clashes or confrontation," the Constitutional Council said in a statement.
It found a French Football Federation (FFF) rule against "any sign or clothing clearly showing political, philosophical, religious or union affiliation" during play to be "appropriate and proportionate".
A group of Muslim women footballers called the "Hijabeuses" had launched the action against the FFF regulation.
The FFF said simply that it had "taken note" of the ruling, adding that the sporting body "reaffirms the republican and civic values that bring football to life, and its total commitment to fighting all forms of discrimination and promoting female-male equality".
Marion Ogier, a lawyer for the "Hijabeuses", said the decision "upsets secularism and freedom of expression" as well as "abusing 30 years of legal precedent" on the question.
"This decision goes against social cohesion in a country founded on diversity and pluralism," she told AFP.
Judges had found themselves under political pressure ahead of the ruling as mainstream parties look to fend off the far right riding high in the polls.
Secularism is a sensitive topic in France, presented by its defenders as a way of guaranteeing the state's religious neutrality and by critics as a dog-whistle against ethnic and religious minorities, especially Muslims.
- 'Don't need to know religion' -
A Monday boost for the "Hijabeuses", when the state's legal advisor concluded the rule was unjustified, prompted a wave of political condemnation.
Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin, a law-and-order hardliner, said Tuesday, "I hope profoundly for the republic that (judges) uphold neutrality on sports fields."
The "Hijabeuses" were hoping to give the republic a "battering", Darmanin added.
"You shouldn't wear religious clothing when you play sports... when you play football, you don't need to know the religion of the person in front of you," he said.
Other voices from the conservative Republicans party and far-right National Rally have also chimed in.
Far-right leader Marine Le Pen wrote on Twitter: "No to the hijab in sport. And we will pass a law to make sure it is respected."
Republicans chief Eric Ciotti said his party -- which holds just 62 seats in France's 577-seat parliament -- would introduce a bill on the topic if the court allowed the hijab.
Sports Minister Amelie Oudea-Castera has also suggested Macron's government could legislate, saying "we aren't ruling anything out" and "we can see that there's a need for clarification".
The Constitutional Council itself shot back Wednesday at what it said were "attacks aimed at the administrative branch and especially the legal advisor".
Questioning the workings of the courts was "an attack on an institution that is essential for democracy," the body added, saying it could take legal action in cases of "insult, defamation, incitement to hatred or threats".
Th.Gonzalez--AT