Last week, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights (NCPCR) issued a directive to the chief secretaries of all States and Union Territories, advocating for the closure of madrasa boards. The commission proposed halting state funding for madrasas and their boards, and suggested that children currently enrolled in madrasas be transitioned to formal schools. Furthermore, the NCPCR recommended transferring all non-Muslim students from madrasas to mainstream schools to ensure they receive a formal education under the Right to Education Act of 2009.
The circular has stirred grave concerns within the Muslim community in India. While the circular is claimed to be framed as an effort to protect the educational rights of children, its implications suggest a more profound challenge to constitutional principles, particularly those ensuring religious freedom and minority rights. Let us examine the constitutional and legal flaws of the order while pondering over the concerns of the Muslim community, who view the move as an infringement on their right to manage educational institutions as enshrined in the Constitution of India.
Autonomy of Religious Educational Institutions
Madrasas have historically been central to the educational, religious, and cultural upbringing of Muslim children in India. These institutions serve a dual role: as centres for religious instruction – focusing on Islamic theology, the Quran, and moral teachings – while transmitting cultural knowledge and identity. The importance of madrasas is not merely pedagogical; they are deeply embedded in the fabric of Muslim society, symbolising the community’s commitment to preserving its religious and cultural heritage.
The Constitution of India, in Articles 29 and 30, guarantees the right of minorities to “establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.”
This protection reflects India’s commitment to its pluralistic ethos and the need for minority communities to maintain their distinct identity through education. Article 30(1), in particular, ensures that religious and linguistic minorities in India can establish and govern their institutions without unwarranted interference from the state.
The NCPCR circular, however, appears to undermine this autonomy. The intent of the circular – to uphold educational standards for children – is commendable. However, the absence of prior consultation with the Muslim community before its issuance raises concerns of overreach. Imposing uniform regulations on madrasas without acknowledging their unique religious and cultural context is a violation of the autonomy granted to these institutions by the Constitution.
Constitutional Provisions and Religious Freedom
A central concern with the NCPCR circular is its apparent disregard for Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to “profess, practise, and propagate” one’s religion. For Muslims, religious education is an inseparable part of their religious practice. Madrasas provide an environment where children are taught to memorise the Quran, learn Islamic jurisprudence, and acquaint themselves with moral and ethical teachings rooted in Islamic theology.
By attempting to regulate madrasa education in the same manner as mainstream schools, the NCPCR circular risks infringing upon religious freedom, which is constitutionally protected. Article 25(1) grants every individual the right to freely practise their religion, subject to considerations of public order, morality, and health. However, the NCPCR’s imposition of uniform regulations on madrasas – many of which focus solely on religious teachings – could be seen as an undue restriction on religious practices. The circular fails to adequately distinguish between secular and religious education, conflating the two and disregarding the subtleties of religious freedom.
Right to Education Act and Its Misapplication
The NCPCR circular references the Right to Education (RTE) Act, 2009, suggesting that madrasas, by not fully conforming to the Act’s provisions, deprive Muslim children of equal access to quality education. This argument, however, is flawed. The RTE Act was enacted to ensure that every child in India can access free and compulsory education from ages 6 to 14. While the intent of the Act is noble, its application to madrasas must be carefully examined.
The RTE Act does not apply uniformly to all educational institutions, particularly those with a distinct religious character. Article 30 explicitly exempts minority institutions from certain regulations that might otherwise undermine their ability to preserve and impart their religious or cultural values. Madrasas enjoy a constitutionally protected status, allowing them to function within a framework that balances religious instruction with general education.
The NCPCR’s insistence that madrasas adhere to the RTE Act’s provisions overlooks this constitutional safeguard. In fact, the Sachar Committee Report (2006) revealed that only a small percentage of Muslim children – approximately 4% – are enrolled in madrasas, while the majority attend mainstream schools. The claim that madrasas systematically deprive Muslim children of quality education is misleading, as many madrasas have already incorporated mainstream subjects such as Science, Mathematics, Hindi, English and regional languages alongside religious studies.
Furthermore, the circular’s recommendation to discontinue state funding for madrasas that do not comply with RTE provisions is based on an inaccurate premise. Most madrasas are community-funded and not dependent on the state. Government support, where provided, is generally aimed at modernising madrasa education by introducing subjects like Mathematics and Computers. The narrative that madrasas are government-funded institutions refusing to comply with regulatory standards is factually incorrect and reflects a broader misunderstanding of the madrasa system.
Cultural and Pedagogical Differences
The NCPCR circular fails to recognise the distinct cultural and pedagogical context in which madrasas operate. The educational philosophy of madrasas is fundamentally different from that of mainstream schools. Madrasas emphasise Islamic theology, Quranic studies, and Arabic, often employing traditional methods like rote memorisation and recitation. The teacher-student relationship in madrasas is hierarchical, centred on transmitting religious knowledge and reflecting the community’s cultural values.
The circular’s effort to enforce uniform standards across all educational institutions overlooks these differences. Assuming that a universal model can apply to both secular and religious institutions is not only unfeasible but also unconstitutional. Madrasas, though distinct, have their own merits, especially in religious education. Standardising madrasa education without considering its religious foundations undermines the diversity of India’s educational landscape.
Additionally, many madrasas, particularly those in rural or economically disadvantaged areas, lack the infrastructure to comply with the stringent regulations proposed in the circular. These institutions often rely on community donations. Imposing mainstream educational standards could lead to their closure, depriving many Muslim children of an education aligned with their religious and cultural values.
Potential for Discrimination and Communal Bias
One of the most concerning issues with the NCPCR circular is that it could lead to discrimination against minority educational institutions. By pushing for uniform educational standards, the circular risks unfairly characterising madrasas as inferior to mainstream schools. If this perception isn’t corrected, it could further marginalise madrasa students and distance their families from the wider education system.
The selective targeting of madrasas in the circular raises concerns about communal bias. The NCPCR’s focus on madrasas, while ignoring pressing issues like child labour, malnutrition, and school dropouts, suggests an agenda that is not purely educational. This perception, that madrasas are being unfairly scrutinised despite their small footprint in the overall educational system, fuels distrust and reinforces feelings of marginalisation among Muslims.
The recommendation to remove non-Muslim children from madrasas and enrol them in formal schools exacerbates this communal bias. Such a directive violates students’ and parents’ freedom of choice and undermines India’s secular fabric, where religious and cultural diversity must be respected and protected.
A Need for Dialogue and Collaboration
The concerns raised by the NCPCR circular highlight the need for a more inclusive and collaborative approach to policy-making. The government must engage in meaningful dialogue with the Muslim community, educational experts, and madrasa representatives to develop policies that respect the educational rights of children and the religious freedoms of minority communities. Such collaboration would ensure that any reforms to madrasa education are sensitive to the cultural and religious contexts in which these institutions operate.
A dialogue-based approach, rather than a top-down imposition of regulations, would foster trust and mutual understanding. This would allow the NCPCR to fulfil its mandate of protecting children’s rights while ensuring that the constitutional rights of minority communities are not compromised.
Balancing Rights and Responsibilities
While the NCPCR’s efforts to ensure quality education for all children are well-intentioned, its circular on madrasa education raises serious concerns about the protection of religious and minority rights under the Constitution of India. The unique role madrasas play in the Muslim community’s educational and religious life must be acknowledged. Imposing uniform standards without considering the distinct needs of madrasa education risks infringing upon the constitutional rights guaranteed under Articles 25, 29, and 30 of the Constitution.
The Muslim community seeks a balanced approach – one that upholds the right to education for all children while protecting the autonomy of religious institutions. By encouraging dialogue and cooperation rather than enforcing what may be viewed as excessive regulation, the government can ensure that the educational rights of children and the constitutional rights of minority communities are both upheld. Only through such a balanced approach can India’s pluralistic and democratic values be truly preserved.
[The writer is Assistant Secretary, Jamaat-e-Islami Hind.]