A high court decision to uphold a prayer ban at one of the highest performing state schools in England has been welcomed by Rishi Sunak and Kemi Badenoch, who described it as a “victory against activists trying to subvert our public institutions”.
The case against Michaela community school in Brent, north-west London, which is famous for its strict discipline code, was brought by a Muslim pupil, known only as TTT in court proceedings, who claimed the ban was discriminatory and breached her right to religious freedom.
Her comments were later criticised by a senior Muslim leader who accused her of sensationalising the case, while the Runnymede Trust, an independent race equality thinktank, warned the ruling set a dangerous precedent.
She also argued that the ban “uniquely” affected her faith due to its ritualised nature, and that Michaela’s policy on prayer was the “kind of discrimination which makes religious minorities feel alienated from society”.
Dr Abdul-Azim Ahmed, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Wales, told the PA news agency he was disappointed the court had failed to defend a “very well-established British principle of freedom of religion”.
Humanists UK chief executive, Andrew Copson, said: “Today’s high court judgment requires serious thinking from the government about how to protect the child’s freedom of religion or belief while also making sure our education system is fair and inclusive to all.
The original article contains 948 words, the summary contains 228 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
A high court decision to uphold a prayer ban at one of the highest performing state schools in England has been welcomed by Rishi Sunak and Kemi Badenoch, who described it as a “victory against activists trying to subvert our public institutions”.
The case against Michaela community school in Brent, north-west London, which is famous for its strict discipline code, was brought by a Muslim pupil, known only as TTT in court proceedings, who claimed the ban was discriminatory and breached her right to religious freedom.
Her comments were later criticised by a senior Muslim leader who accused her of sensationalising the case, while the Runnymede Trust, an independent race equality thinktank, warned the ruling set a dangerous precedent.
She also argued that the ban “uniquely” affected her faith due to its ritualised nature, and that Michaela’s policy on prayer was the “kind of discrimination which makes religious minorities feel alienated from society”.
Dr Abdul-Azim Ahmed, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Wales, told the PA news agency he was disappointed the court had failed to defend a “very well-established British principle of freedom of religion”.
Humanists UK chief executive, Andrew Copson, said: “Today’s high court judgment requires serious thinking from the government about how to protect the child’s freedom of religion or belief while also making sure our education system is fair and inclusive to all.
The original article contains 948 words, the summary contains 228 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!