Supreme Court: Finnish Police's Forcible Removal of Hijabs Was Lawful

HELSINKI — Finland's Supreme Court has ruled that police officers were acting within the law when they forcibly removed hijab headscarves from two female asylum seekers. The decision, announced on 22 September 2026, upholds earlier rulings from a district court and a court of appeal.

What Happened

The case dates back to May 2017, when two women went to a police station in Hämeenlinna to register their asylum applications. Police needed to take registration photographs of the women without their head coverings. The women refused, saying their religious beliefs required them to keep their hijabs on.

According to the Finnish Police Board's guidelines at the time, if a person wears a headscarf or veil for religious reasons, photographs must be taken both with and without the covering. Because of this rule, a police inspector ordered officers to remove the women's scarves, by force if necessary.

The incident led to charges against seven police officers and security guards for assault, incitement to assault, and breach of duty. A district court dismissed the charges in 2022, and the Court of Appeal upheld that decision in 2024.

The Supreme Court's Decision

The Supreme Court confirmed that the police officers committed no offence. The court stated that taking photographs without headscarves served an acceptable societal goal: the proper processing of asylum applications and verification of an applicant's identity.

However, the court also stressed that force should only be used as a "last resort measure" and only after "advice, requests, and orders" have not been sufficient.

The ruling is significant because it may set a precedent for similar cases in the future.

Reactions

The decision drew criticism from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights group based in Washington, D.C.

In a statement, CAIR said: "Forcing a Muslim woman to remove her hijab against her will is a severe violation of religious freedom, human dignity, and bodily autonomy. It is deeply disappointing that Finland's highest court has sanctioned the use of physical force against vulnerable individuals seeking safety".

CAIR also argued that identification procedures can be conducted in ways that balance safety needs with respect for religious rights.

Background

The case has been closely watched in Finland and across Europe because it raises important questions about how governments balance security and administrative needs with religious freedom. The Supreme Court's ruling settles the legal question for now, but the debate over the treatment of asylum seekers and religious minorities is likely to continue.