A RACIAL abuse trial has been halted after a key prosecution witness refused to give evidence unless she is allowed to wear a full face veil.

Richard Hynd's trial in which he is accused of threatening and making racially offensive remarks to two women near to Dunfermline Central Mosque and Islamic Street was due to begin yesterday.

However, the court was told that an 'essential' Crown witness, who is understood to be an Imam and wife of one of the alleged victims, would only take to the stand if she could wear the Niqab.

Mr Hynd's defence lawyer Alexander Flett said she was not prepared to remove the item of clothing to allow her to be identified by the court.

His 50-year-old client has pleaded not guilty to acting in racially aggravated manner towards Amanat Hussain Shah and Sayyeda Ruqaya on July 18 this year.

It is alleged that Mr Hynd, of Woodmill Crescent, Dunfermline, shouted, swore and acted an aggressive manner, uttered threats and made racially offensive remarks.

Mr Flett added: “When asked if she was prepared to remove the veil for identification she said no.

“I’m not aware of a single case in the United Kingdom where a witness has been allowed to give evidence wearing a veil.”

"This leaves the Crown in a difficulty and I’m not sure how the Crown can address that.”

The solicitor said since being made aware of the situation he had been researching the topic via news reports on the internet. He reiterated that he believed there had not been a case in the UK where a witness had given evidence while wearing a veil.

Mr Flett said he appreciated that the court would need time to consider what could be a “volatile” issue.

Sheriff Craig McSherry said he found it “extremely hard to understand” why the matter had not been raised before the day of the trial.

Mr Flett cited a European Court of Human Rights finding that there was “no human right to be veiled at all times.”

He pointed that anyone wearing a veil would have to remove it at passport control or to have a photograph taken for a driving licence.

Sheriff McSherry said: “In a matter of such importance there would have to be a full discussion. This should have taken place long ago and not on the day of the trial.”

Depute fiscal Louise Ward confirmed the female witness in question was at court. She said she was viewed as an “essential” witness.

The sheriff said, “If that’s her position in order for the Crown to have evidence from her there would have to be decision from the court.”

“It’s a question of respecting the witness’ religious beliefs against the interests of justice and the interests of the accused Mr Hynd.”

The case was adjourned until February.