Dangerous weapon charges dropped against Sikh with ceremonial dagger

A charge of carrying a dangerous weapon was dismissed against a Sikh man arrested in Kern County with a ceremonial dagger in his possession. Sahadur Singh, a Utah truck driver, was traveling through Kern County on Dec. 30 when he was stopped for a traffic violation by California Highway Patrol officers. Singh, a baptized Sikh, had a kirpan, a short dagger used in religious ceremonies, in his truck and the officers arrested him in part on suspicion of carrying a dangerous weapon, according to court documents. That charge and misdemeanor charges of resisting arrest and taking up two or more lanes while driving were dismissed. Singh pleaded no contest to driving without a license and disturbing the peace and was sentenced to three years probation, court records said. Sahadur Singh said the arresting officers kept asking whether he was a terrorist or involved with the Taliban, said Manjit Singh, a representative of the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund, a non-profit civil rights organization. Intervening on Sahadur Singh’s behalf, the organization sent a letter to the Kern County District Attorney’s office explaining what a kirpan was and that, in similar cases, charges of carrying a dangerous weapon were dropped. Police reports weren’t immediately available, but there was no mention of harassment on the part of officers in court documents. And attorney Stanley Simrin, who represented Sahadur Singh, said his client never told him that officers accused him of being a terrorist. “I think it was a language or a cultural problem,” Simrin said of the incident. An interpreter was present for Sahadur Singh’s court appearances, according to court documents. [http://www.bakersfield.com] The Bakersfield Californian

Judge Improperly Demanded Sikh American Man Take Off His “Hat” In Courtroom Washington D.C. – August 31, 2007: The American Civil Liberties Union of Texas filed a lawsuit today in Dallas County District Court on behalf of Amardeep Singh, against the Honorable Albert Cercone, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 1, Place 3. Singh charges religious discrimination stemming from a 2006 incident in which he was ordered out of Judge Cercone’s courtroom and threatened with arrest when he refused to remove his turban while defending himself against a traffic citation. Singh has also filed a complaint with the State Commission on Judicial Misconduct about the incident. “There is no question that Amardeep Singh’s rights have been violated,” said Lisa Graybill, Legal Director of the ACLU of Texas. “Judge Cercone not only denied Mr. Singh his basic rights to religious practice while defending himself in court, he caused him deep humiliation as well. For Singh, the turban signifies devotion to God, and is an integral part of a Sikh’s identity, just as a yarmulke is for Jewish men or a hijab is for Muslim women.” Singh appeared in Judge Cercone’s court on June 23, 2006 because of a traffic citation. When he arrived, he was told by a court employee that he was in violation of the court’s “no hats” policy and that he must remove his “hat.” Although Singh tried to explain to Judge Cercone that his turban was not an accessory but instead an important part of his faith, Judge Cercone said that if Singh did not leave the courtroom and stayed with his “hat” on, he would be arrested. After consulting with his uncle, a Sikh priest, Singh removed his turban. “I could not believe that here in the United States, a judge whose job it is to uphold the law would show such disrespect for my religion,” said Singh. “As a devout Sikh, my hair, beard, and turban have deep religious meaning to me. I treat this article of faith with utmost respect and pride. A turban is not an optional clothing item to put on and remove at will. Ordering me to remove my turban was extremely humiliating for me.” Singh contacted Rajbir Singh Datta, Associate Director of the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF) in Washington, D.C., who tried to resolve the matter with Judge Cercone before referring Singh to the ACLU of Texas. “I am surprised and disappointed that it came to this,” said Datta. “SALDEF has successfully resolved similar incidents in other states without having to resort to litigation. For example, a judge in Georgia who made a similar demand issued an apology after we interceded, and changed the court’s policy to ensure that the critical American principles of religious freedom and expression would be respected in the future.” The case is being brought under the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), which prohibits government authorities from burdening an individual’s right to free expression of his or her religion. “This case presents an issue of first impression under the Texas RFRA,” said Jerry Murad, Jr., a volunteer attorney with the ACLU of Texas who is representing Singh in this matter. “We believe RFRA’s prohibition on substantially burdening a person’s free exercise of religion clearly applies to the judge in this case.” To see a copy of the court filings and learn more about ACLU of Texas’ work on religious freedom, go to http://www.aclutx.org. For more information on the ACLU’s work to protect religious freedom throughout the United States, go to http://www.aclu.org/religion/index.html. For more information on SALDEF, the Sikh faith, and the importance of the turban to Sikhs, go to www.SALDEF.org.

SALDEF works with local civic officials to resolve issue and organize training for local police and security officials Washington D.C. – March 29, 2007: Earlier this month, the Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF), the nation’s oldest Sikh American civil rights and advocacy organization, received a formal apology from the City of Lawrenceville, Georgia, for wrongfully denying Mr. Jasmeen Singh Nanda entry to the city courthouse. Late last Fall, Mr. Nanda arrived at the Lawrenceville Municipal Court to contest a minor traffic violation he received. After Mr. Nanda successfully passed through the security screening, two Lawrenceville police officers informed Mr. Nanda that, “[w]hatever you have on your head, you need to remove it immediately.” Mr. Nanda explained that he was not wearing a hat, but rather a religious head covering called a turban. After trying to explain the significance of the Sikh turban, Mr. Nanda was accosted (assaulted) by one of the officers who disrespectfully touched and squeezed his turban several times while asking him, “[w]hat is that on top of your head?” Mr. Nanda was threatened with arrest and told that he would, “need to show me your hair before you enter the court room or get out of here and get out of my face and stop wasting our time.” Mr. Nanda at this point left the court house and immediately informed SALDEF of the incident. SALDEF asked the City of Lawrenceville to revise its current court room policy relating to religious garb and to allow SALDEF to conduct a cultural awareness presentation for the court personnel. SALDEF presented a model security screening procedure and protocol that is respectful of not only the Sikh turban, but an individual wearing a religious head covering. Subsequent to the communication and discussion with SALDEF on court room policy relating to religious garb currently being implemented in Lawrenceville, city officials agreed to formally change their policy and to have SALDEF conduct a cultural awareness presentation for the officers and court room personnel in the Spring. The formal change in policy states, “[I]f the headwear is donned in observance of a religious tenet, the Court Services officers will not ask the person to remove the headwear.” SALDEF thanks Lawrenceville City Attorney, Anthony Powell and Police Chief Randy Johnson for their desire to resolve this issue amicably with a formal change of policy and increased awareness of the Sikh American community, a growing population in the Southern United States. SALDEF would also like to acknowledge the courage of Jasmeen Singh Nanda for seeking to protect his First Amendment rights. Read about SALDEF’s similar efforts to protect against violations of Sikhs Americans First Amendment Rights:

Incident forces county to implement new policies permitting religious head coverings Washington, DC – The Sikh American Legal Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF) thanks Judge Helen Harper of Laurens County, Georgia, for offering an apology to Tarun Singh Kataria, a Sikh American male, who was denied entry to the court due to its “no hats” policy. Additionally, the court instituted a formal written change to its security policy regarding religious head coverings which explicitly mentions Sikh Americans. SALDEF intervened in the case on behalf of Mr. Kataria when in August 2005 he arrived at the Lauren’s County Probate Court to contest a traffic violation, and was asked by the court security to remove his turban due to the court’s “no-hat” policy. Mr. Kataria refused to remove his religiously mandated turban and was prevented from entering the court building, and thus denied his constitutional right to defend himself in a court of law. Mr. Kataria contacted SALDEF seeking redress for this issue. SALDEF immediately contacted the county attorney and judge demanding a letter of apology, clarification of their policy on religious head coverings, and asking that the court allow Mr. Kataria the ability to contest the ticket. In her letter to SALDEF and Mr. Kataria, Judge Harper stated, “The Court’s “No-Hat’s” policy is not, and never has been, intended to deny anyone their constitutional rights, or to discriminate against any religious beliefs. I sincerely regret any embarrassment or inconvenience you may have experienced.” In working with both Judge Harper and County Attorney Billy Kight, SALDEF was able to receive a formal letter of apology from the court and get a full refund of the traffic violation for Mr. Kataria. SALDEF applauds the court for adoption of new protocols for dealing with individuals who wear mandatory religious head-coverings. “I am glad that I contacted SALDEF and can’t thank them enough for their persistence and aggressive pursuit of my case,” said Mr. Kataria. “SALDEF’s involvement was vital in resolving my case with such a positive outcome. SALDEF’s long history of dedicated and committed work is a great service to the Sikh American community.” “This outcome is a tremendous step in making sure that people of faith are not discriminated against and allowed all the rights and liberties guaranteed to them,” said SALDEF President Mirin Kaur Phool. “The changing of the court policy will not only affect Sikh Americans but also Muslim men with skullcaps, Muslim women wearing hijab, Jewish men with yarmulkes, Christian women with religious head coverings, and all other people who wear mandatory religious attire.” Such issues of religious liberty continue to occur across the United States. In fact, SALDEF has assisted Sikhs in Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Washington State who have been denied entrance into restaurants and businesses over the last year. We urge Sikhs across the country to contact SALDEF if you experience any incidents where you have been denied entrance into an establishment, private or public, due to your faith, or if you have in any way been prohibited from practicing your faith freely. To help the community better respond to an incident, SALDEF has developed the Know What To Do Guide; a handy pocket guide that details the steps that should be taken in the event of a hate crime, discrimination in the workplace, or racial profiling, and states your rights as an airline passenger. You can download Know What To Do Guide here. Please print and distribute the pocket guide at your local Gurdwara, as well as to your local community, family and friends. To order the pocket guides from SALDEF, please send an email to: pubs@saldef.org.

SMART Expresses Satisfaction, Encourages Sikh Americans to Report Discrimination Washington, DC – Delta Airlines and its regional carrier recently reached an agreement with a Sikh American passenger, Hansdip Singh Bindra, who filed a lawsuit alleging racial profiling, intimidation and harassment during a routine commercial flight two years ago.  The terms of the agreement, which remain confidential, were satisfactory to all parties concerned, including Mr. Bindra. “This was a deeply troubling experience for Hansdip and his family.  However, we feel Mr. Bindra’s civil rights and those of other Sikh American air travelers were vindicated through this settlement,” said SMART President Manjit Singh.  “We supported Hansdip’s case from the outset because it represented an intolerable trend of racial profiling and harassment of Sikh Americans in this country.  We hope Sikh Americans will continue to come forward and inform us about similar unprofessional and illegal conduct because there is no justification for these actions against any American.” The lawsuit was initially filed in September 2003 against Delta Airlines, Inc., its partner Atlantic Coast Airlines, Inc. (now known as Independence Air) and the flight crew following a November 2002 flight when Mr. Bindra reportedly experienced harassment and intimidation.  A software consultant who maintains a turban and beard in accordance with his Sikh faith, Mr. Bindra alleged that he was confronted by a flight attendant who informed him that he and others from “the Middle East” should maintain a “low profile.” According to the lawsuit, which was supported by sworn affidavits of other passengers on the airplane, Mr. Bindra attempted to inform the flight attendant that he was a Sikh of South Asian origin, but was told to “shut up,” “stay seated” and “do not cause any problems.”  Furthermore, the flight attendant told Mr. Bindra that she felt threatened by his presence on the airplane and was going to ask the captain to take the airplane back to the gate so that Mr. Bindra could be removed by law enforcement officials. The flight attendant also approached several passengers prior to the flight’s departure and commented “she would not allow what happened before on this flight,” making reference to the terrorist attacks of 9/11.  She then solicited the passengers help to physically subdue Mr. Bindra on her signal, because she felt he would be “trouble” on the flight. In response to these events, a number of Mr. Bindra’s fellow travelers filed complaints against the flight attendant at the conclusion of the flight.  Passengers were outraged at the flight attendant and felt she had lost her composure and she, not Mr. Bindra, was a security risk to the flight. The civil rights training of Delta employees, which Mr. Bindra sought as relief in connection with his lawsuit, conforms with a June 22, 2004 settlement of a similar lawsuit against Delta brought by the U.S. Department of Transportation.  As a part of that settlement, which similarly alleged discrimination after the September 11th attacks against travelers believed to be Muslim or of Arab, Middle Eastern or South Asian descent, Delta has agreed to provide civil rights training over the next two years to its pilots, flight attendants and passenger service agents.  Under the agreement, the training must cost the company no less than $900,000. SMART welcomes Delta’s recognition of the need to develop and train a workforce that is well trained in the civil rights laws of the United States, and looks forward to working with Delta and other airlines to achieve these goals.

Jury Rejects Insanity Plea in Arizona case Mesa, AZ — A jury yesterday found Frank Roque guilty of first-degree murder for his slaying of Balbir Singh Sodhi. Roque murdered Sodhi during a rampage four days after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which included shootings at those who were, or appeared to be Middle Eastern. Mr. Singh, a 49-year-old immigrant from India, wore a turban and beard in accordance with his Sikh faith when he was shot outside his gas station. Manjit Singh, President of the Sikh Mediawatch and Resource Task Force (SMART), a national civil rights organization, said, “The Sodhi family has endured a great deal for the last two years following Balbir’s death. This honest, hard-working man was killed simply because of the way he looked. We hope this conviction will shed light on the persisting problem of hate crimes which are rooted in ignorance and intimidate entire communities.” Although Roque’s defense attorneys mounted an insanity defense, jurors apparently were swayed by the prosecution’s evidence that Roque’s attack was motivated by hatred and bias. The jury also found Roque guilty of five other charges, including attempted murder and reckless endangerment, related to drive-by shootings at other individuals he perceived to be Middle Eastern. The case will enter a second phase of the trial on Thursday, with jurors determining whether Roque is eligible for the death penalty. Singh stated that his organization has noticed an increase in hate crimes since the war in Iraq. Furthermore, he said that SMART recently conducted a briefing on Capitol Hill highlighting post-9/11 backlash incidents directed at Sikhs and other South Asians, and is supporting federal legislation to provide law enforcement agencies more resources to investigate and prosecute hate crimes. “Hate violence can tear communities apart,” Singh said. “Sikh Americans have long endured discrimination, and although legislation cannot expunge hate from our society, our lawmakers must send a clear message that these insidious acts of violence are inconsistent with America’s promise of freedom and tolerance.”