The recent wave of protests against hijab restrictions in the Republic of Azerbaijan—sparked by Cabinet Ministers decree regarding school uniforms—has become the starting point for on-the-ground demonstrations and the initial focal points of spontaneous domestic unrest.
The first signs of public protest emerged after officials at School No. 9 in the Jalilabad district barred girls wearing the hijab from entering classrooms; these protests quickly spread to other cities, including Baku. Subsequently, Azerbaijani authorities defended the Ministry of Science and Education’s decree of September 21, 2026—which prohibits any attire inconsistent with the "principle of secular public education"—asserting that it aligns with the country's secular constitution. Although the specific phrase "hijab ban" does not appear in the text of the decree, it declares any attire inconsistent with the official uniform to be unauthorized—a clause effectively amounting to a ban on the hijab. In this context, the following points are significant:
1.Public protests against the hijab ban in the Republic of Azerbaijan have been entirely spontaneous and represent a natural reaction to the violation of fundamental civil rights. In this context, even teachers and students who do not wear the hijab stepped forward; in a spontaneous social movement, they demonstrated their solidarity with the expelled schoolgirls by participating in marches and class boycotts. Religious communities and Islamic activists within Azerbaijan also viewed the Ministry of Education’s anti-hijab decree as a clear violation of the constitution, freedom of belief, and the right to education. Meanwhile, figures and media outlets close to the Azerbaijani government have attempted to portray this spontaneous movement as alleged foreign ideological interference by Turkey and Iran, using it as a pretext to crack down on hijab advocates. This is despite the fact that there is no evidence of Iranian or Turkish involvement in the matter; the primary cause of the protests and unrest was the Azerbaijani Ministry of Education's anti-hijab decree.
2. Efforts by Zionist media, as well as officials and media outlets aligned with Israel, to accuse Turkey and Iran of interfering in Azerbaijan's internal affairs and inciting protesters are seen as reflecting Tel Aviv's strategy to undermine Baku's relations with its two key neighbors and to discredit the spontaneous actions taken by the Azerbaijani people against the hijab ban.
Many political and media analysts believe that Israel is the force behind the scenes—or at least the primary beneficiary—of this situation. Friendly relations between Baku, Ankara, and Tehran have long been a source of concern for Israel; media outlets aligned with the Zionist regime aim to weaken Azerbaijan's regional ties with its Muslim neighbors by highlighting anti-Islamic stances in Azerbaijan and deliberately pitting Baku against Muslim public opinion in Turkey and Iran. Some also view Israel's approach as part of a broader scenario aimed at steering the Republic of Azerbaijan toward a strictly secular identity aligned with Tel Aviv's strategic interests in the Caucasus.
3. There is no doubt that the entirely spontaneous popular movement opposing the ban on the hijab in schools occurred without foreign interference; while the country's Muslims welcome moral support from Muslim nations, they oppose any action that would highlight foreign involvement in this event—a stance that demonstrates the political maturity of Muslim political parties and groups. Furthermore, the secular constitution of the Republic of Azerbaijan recognizes the freedom of worship for followers of various religions, including Islam, as a fundamental right of citizenship.
Accordingly, reason dictates that the country's authorities—by upholding the constitution, adhering to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and observing the standards of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation—should not oppose the hijab itself, which is a religious ruling and a fundamental tenet of Islam, nor should they further position themselves in opposition to the people.
MNA