Sikhs at risk of being banned from courts

[Udayana]

Of course it matters - the opt out is on the basis that carrying a knife is a religious requirement. And therefore it is only a justifiable exception if the carrier is able to demonstrate that they, as an individual, demonstrate that they genuinely hold the belief that it is a religious requirement. Clearly if they don't carry a knife most of the time that would demonstrate that they do not genuinely hold the belief that it is a religious requirement. In which case the exception would not be justifies and the carrying of the knife would be unlawful.

However, as I've pointed out, the courts are extremely unlikely to get to judge this matter as the 'default' is that Sikhs can carry knives, while the precision of the law is that Sikhs who genuinely hold the belief that it is a religious requirement to carry a knife are exempt.

"Default"? An over used word on this forum.  Anyone stopped carrying knife could claim to be a Sikh or pick from a range of excuses. It is up to the police and courts to come to a practical decision as to whether they are being truthful.

[jeremyp]

I know some Sikhs who feel they need to carry the kirpan as they have made a personal vow, to. ie. it is a matter of personal integrity. I don't know what, if any, case was made when the Criminal Justice Act was put together in 1988.
 
I should think the risks of being stabbed by a kirpan carrying Sikh losing his/her temper are negligible, especially in comparison to those of being stabbed by someone carrying a knife illegally.

There's also negligible risk of being stabbed by me with a knife and yet I can't carry one in public with impunity. Nobody cares about my personal integrity though.

[ProfessorDavey]

"Default"? An over used word on this forum.  Anyone stopped carrying knife could claim to be a Sikh or pick from a range of excuses. It is up to the police and courts to come to a practical decision as to whether they are being truthful.

Sure the police might ask some superficial questions to establish whether, prime face, the person is Sikh. But they are never going to probe whether that individual's belief that carrying a knife is a religious requirement is genuine. Are they really going to probe whether that individual always carries the knife, which would be the acid test of the genuineness of that belief. I very much doubt it. If on the face of it the person seems 'credibly' Sikh that's likely to be the end of it.

And the police don't interpret the law, they just apply it. Interpretation would come from the courts and I cannot see how the case of a non-genuine Sikh who once in a while carries a knife more for cultural rather than religious belief reasons would ever come to court to be challenged and therefore the position of the law clarified.