Amnesty International has condemned a new piece of legislation passed by the Portuguese Parliament that bans face coverings in public spaces. This development has significant implications for civil liberties and individual autonomy in Portugal. As explained by João Godinho Martins, executive director of Amnesty International in Portugal, the ban could lead to greater social exclusion and challenges for women who choose to wear full-face veils, contradicting the stated goal of promoting women’s rights. More insights can be found on JURIST.
The legislation, which received approval on October 17, 2025, originated from the far-right Chega party and was supported by the ruling centre-right Social Democratic Party and the Liberal Initiative. Although the initial draft targeted Islamic garments like the burqa and niqab, it was revised to avoid constitutional conflicts. The final version introduces a universal ban, ostensibly for reasons of public order and security, but Amnesty International warns of its potential to disproportionately impact Muslim women and entrench a form of state-sponsored Islamophobia.
The broader European context highlights a worrying trend, as countries such as Austria, Belgium, France, and Denmark have enacted similar bans. These measures often leverage the rhetoric of gender equality to justify legal interventions that critics argue actually perpetuate discrimination. The new Portuguese law is seen as risking a “neutrality trap,” where claims of impartiality can mask bias against certain religious expressions, particularly for marginalized communities.
Furthermore, the ban raises concerns about potential future misuse, where it could be employed to suppress political dissent and infringe upon freedoms guaranteed by international human rights standards, such as the right to freedom of assembly protected under Article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Existing legislation already allows for the removal of face coverings for security purposes, prompting questions about the necessity and motivation behind the new law. The critical reflection on these issues underscores the tension between national security claims and fundamental rights, posing broader questions about the balance of religious freedom and state interests in an increasingly multicultural Europe.