The question of whether Muslim women are allowed to drive a car while fully veiled is currently occupying a remarkable number of courts in Germany. In July last year, the Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia ruled on the issue, followed by the Higher Administrative Court of Rhineland-Palatinate in August and the Administrative Court in Berlin in January. Just a few days ago, the matter was decided by the Administrative Court in Trier; rulings from other courts are still pending. “I have the right to show my face to whomever I want,” said a 46-year-old plaintiff. Full veiling with a niqab, she said, “is therefore a feeling of freedom and peace for me.”
The number of devout Muslim women who wear a niqab is estimated nationwide to be in the low hundreds. The fact that there are still a relatively large number of lawsuits is also due to Dennis Rathkamp. The 36-year-old trained automotive mechatronics technician supported the plaintiff not only in Münster but also in Berlin. Rathkamp is the president of the Federal Islamic Union (FIU), a strictly conservative Islamic association.
The Federal Islamic Union (FIU), based in Hanover, is a registered association with—according to its own information—3,579 members. It sees itself as an advocate for the rights of all Muslims in Germany. As a self-declared representative of “all German-speaking Muslims,” the association offers both religious services for Muslims (e.g., a fatwa hotline) and highlights various anti-Muslim incidents, disseminating them to a broad audience via social media. The association also offers help and support in legal disputes (e.g., related to hijab bans) and, according to its website, advocates for the legal recognition and equal status of Islam as an official religious community. The FIU, however, fails to mention that Islam as a religion cannot be recognized as a public law corporation—only individual congregations can. The organization is particularly committed to using public campaigns to connect with as broad a spectrum of German-speaking Muslims as possible.
In a press release from mid-January, the FIU stated that it was now supporting 20 niqab-wearing women in their court cases in Germany. This is because the 2017 ban in the German Road Traffic Regulations on driving while fully veiled, they argue, follows a clearly political agenda. “It is correct that we are supporting the affected women in these cases,” Rathkamp confirmed in writing upon inquiry by the Süddeutsche Zeitung. “As an organization, we are committed to combating religious discrimination—regardless of whether it comes from private individuals or is politically motivated by government bodies.”
On the FIU’s website, users can download a template for an application for exemption from the traffic regulation. There is also a guide on how to fill it out. “You should particularly state which religion you belong to, since when, and why the covering requirement is religiously binding for you,” it says. After a number of court defeats, the association has added a kind of disclaimer to the form: “At present, the application is likely to be rejected with reference to the negative rulings of some administrative courts.”
German security authorities classify the association as part of Salafism. Salafists are Muslims who follow the religious practices of the Prophet Muhammad’s era. Many do so only in terms of their private religious life. Others have a missionary zeal, and some are even prepared to use violence. The state of Lower Saxony has been monitoring the FIU for years.
This may sound exaggerated in light of just a handful of niqab-related lawsuits. But so-called legalistic Islamists, whom the Office for the Protection of the Constitution includes the FIU among, are said to “use legal avenues to gradually influence social and political structures,” with the aim of ultimately transforming them based on Sharia, i.e., Islamic law, “as a universally valid order.”
The lawsuits over driving with a niqab are, therefore, just one component. For example, the FIU supported a student at the University of Kiel who in 2019 wanted to challenge the veil ban in lecture halls there. A year later, after the Hanau attack in which nine people with migrant backgrounds were murdered, the association launched an online petition for a federal commissioner to protect Muslims in Germany. Also in 2020, the Union successfully sued before the Federal Constitutional Court against strict COVID restrictions on worship services in Lower Saxony. The ruling from Karlsruhe was a major victory for the small association, which began its work at the end of 2017 with just seven members.
The founders include Dennis Rathkamp and Marcel Krass, who today serve as president and spokesperson of the FIU. Rathkamp and Krass converted to Islam years ago and have long been known in Salafist circles. While they deny that either Krass or the FIU “have any connection to extremist networks or ideologies,” German intelligence services describe Krass as a “Salafist preacher.” The FIU’s proximity to Salafism, they say, is also evident through services like the so-called fatwa support—a consultation service for religious legal questions. Until 2023, the FIU also stated that it adhered to the understanding of the “pious forefathers,” a fundamentalist interpretation of Islam.
Among devout Muslims, this offering from the Islamic Union appears to resonate. According to the FIU, its membership has grown from seven members in 2017 to nearly 5,500; the goal for this year is 7,000. “The growth is so strong,” says Rathkamp in a self-promotional video, that the association’s major goal might be achieved not in 30 years, but in just five to ten: recognition as a public law corporation.
This classification, also known as an “honorary title,” is currently reserved for the major Christian churches, some Jewish synagogue communities, and the Salvation Army, and grants additional rights. Unlike an association, such a religious community could, for example, collect taxes. At the same time, the bar for this status is high. A religious community must not only be legally compliant but also be structured and have a membership base that ensures long-term stability. Jehovah’s Witnesses, for instance, only received the title in 2006 after nearly 30 years of legal battles.
That the FIU is serious about its goal is evident in its choice of legal representatives: in the Berlin niqab case, the plaintiff was advised by Benjamin Kirschbaum. Three years ago, Kirschbaum had a quite unique legal success to announce: advised by him and his law firm Winheller, an Islamic religious community in North Rhine-Westphalia was granted public law corporation status.
In the matter of full-face veiling while driving, however, Kirschbaum and the other FIU cases were less successful. Neither in Berlin, Trier, nor elsewhere were the plaintiffs’ demands granted. But according to one of the judges involved, the FIU is not even aiming to win at the administrative court level. Rather, the goal is to pursue these cases all the way to the Federal Constitutional Court.
